Category: Media

KGM v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others: QBD 1 Dec 2010

The claimant had obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendant newspapers from publishing stories about him, together with an order protecting his identity within the proceedings. The defendants now sought to have the injunctions set aside.
Held: It was often important to make an assessment of the Claimant’s own attitude towards the maintaining of privacy. The Claimant here was a robust character and that was a factor to be taken into account.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3145 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – KGM v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others CA 25-May-2011
. .
See Also – Hutcheson (Formerly Known As ‘KGM’) v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others CA 19-Jul-2011
The claimant appealed against the refusal of a privacy order, protecting his identity in his claim.
Held: The appeal was refused. That Article 8 was ‘engaged’ was not conclusive of the question whether the claimant enjoyed a reasonable . .
Cited – Ferdinand v MGN Limited QBD 29-Sep-2011
The claimant, a famous footballer, complained that an article by the defendant relating an affair he had had, had infringed his right to privacy. The defendant relied on its right to freedom of expression. The claimant had at an earlier stage, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.440200

CDE and Another v MGN Ltd and Another: QBD 16 Dec 2010

In considering a request for injunction restraining publication of private matters, the court may consider also the effect of publication on a child of the claimant’s family.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3308 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – TSE and ELP v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 23-May-2011
The claimants had obtained an injunction preventing publication of details of their private lives and against being publicly named. The newspaper had not attempted to raise any public interest defence. Various publications had taken place to breach . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media, Litigation Practice

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.428325

DL v SL (Ancillary Relief Proceedings: Anonymity): FD 27 Jul 2015

FPR r 27.10 provides a clear starting point or presumption, which should not be derogated from unless there was a compelling reason, that ancillary relief proceedings should be heard in private. Whilst media may be allowed to attend, such proceedings covered any very private details of the parties’ lives.

Judges:

Mostyn J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 2621 (Fam), [2016] 2 FLR 552, [2015] Fam Law 1474, [2016] 1 WLR 1259, [2015] WLR(D) 391

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Family Proceedings Rules 27.10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Media

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.552775

Attorney-General v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: CA 12 Feb 1983

The Attorney General brought contempt proceedings against five newspapers who had wriitten about two entries made to Buckingham Palace by Michael Fagan. Amongst the newspapers found guilty of contempt was The Sunday Times.
Held: The newspapers were guilty because the publications created a risk that the jury might be prejudiced.
Oliver LJ said: ‘The course of justice is not just concerned with the outcome of proceedings. It is concerned with the whole process of the law, including the freedom of a person accused of a crime to elect, so far as the law permits him to do so, the mode of trial which he prefers and to conduct his defence in the way which seems best to him and to his advisers. Any extraneous factor or external pressure which impedes or restricts that election or that conduct, or which impels a person accused to adopt a course in the conduct of his own defence which he does not wish to adopt, deprives him to an extent of the freedom of choice which the law confers upon him and is, in my judgment, not only a prejudice but a serious prejudice.’ He found the publication objectionable on the basis that The Sunday Times seemed to be ‘gunning’ for Fagan whose solicitor said ‘because it was the article which prompted him to decide that Fagan should be tried on indictment on the assault charge and that of driving away a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent. It was the direct and immediate effect of the article which determined Fagan’s option for summary trial and kept the assault charge hanging over him until October.’

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ, Ackner LJ, Oliver LJ

Citations:

Times 12-Feb-1983

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney General v Michael Ronald Unger; Manchester Evening News Limited and Associated Newspapers Limited Admn 3-Jul-1997
Complaint was made that the defendant newspapers had caused a serious prejudice to a trial by articles published before the trial of the defendant in criminal proceedings. The defendant pleaded guilty to theft at the magistrates’ court after she had . .
Cited – HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd and Another Admn 29-Jul-2011
The police arrested a man on suspicion of the murder of a young woman. He was later released and exonerated, and a second man arrested and later convicted. Whilst the first was in custody the two defendant newspapers, the Daily Mirror and the Sun . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Contempt of Court

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.272780

In re The Lawyer: ChD 3 May 2006

Complaint was made that the magazine had published the result of a case on its website before the draft judgment had been officially released.
Held: It was vital that all news media recognise that draft judgments were subject to an embargo. It was important that a system which was designed to aid the parties and the media was not abused. The damage here was not significant, and the magazine had taken steps to train its journalists, and therefore no contempt had taken place.

Judges:

Peter Smith J

Citations:

Times 24-May-2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.242450

Clear Channel United Kingdom Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v First Secretary of State and Another: Admn 14 Oct 2004

The claimant sought a declaration that it had a tenancy for its occupation by an advertising station, and that it had protection under the 1954 Act. The defendant council said that only a licence had been granted.
Held: The grants included the areas surrounding the concrete bases on which the stations were erected. Despite the lease-like terms of the agreements, only licences had been granted since it was envisaged that the land owner could recover possession when required. The erection of the station was ‘expressed in the language of permissive use to place something on another’s land, and not as the grant of a proprietary interest in, and exclusive possession of, land.’

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2483 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 8, Landlord and Tenant Act 1954

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Street v Mountford HL 6-Mar-1985
When a licence is really a tenancy
The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted.
Held: . .
Cited – Addiscombe Garden Estates Ltd v Crabbe CA 1957
The trustees of a tennis club took possession of tennis courts and a clubhouse under a lease, and sought a new lease under the 1954 Act. The landlord said that they were only licensees and in any event were not entitled to a new lease since they . .
Cited – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham and Another HL 4-Jul-2002
The claimants sought ownership by adverse possession of land. Once the paper owner had been found, they indicated a readiness to purchase their interest. The court had found that this letter contradicted an animus possidendi. The claimant had . .
Cited – Powell v McFarlane ChD 1977
Intention to Establish Adverse Possession of Land
A squatter had occupied the land and defended a claim for possession. The court discussed the conditions necessary to establish an intention to possess land adversely to the paper owner.
Held: Slade J said: ‘It will be convenient to begin by . .
Cited – Hagee (London) Ltd v A B Erikson and Larson (a Firm) CA 1975
Tenancy at Will not protectable by 1954 Act
A tenancy at will falls outside the protection of the 1954 Act, though ‘parties cannot impose upon an agreement, by a choice of label, a nature or character which on its proper construction it does not possess’. Entry into possession while . .
Cited – Cardiothoracic Institute v Shrewdcrest Ltd ChD 1986
The landlord hoped to redevelop a site. The defendant was in possession as a business tenant pursuant to three successive leases for which orders had been made under section 38(4) of the 1954 Act excluding the operation of sections 24 to 28 of the . .
Cited – Javad v Aqil CA 15-May-1990
P in possession – tenancy at will Until Completion
A prospective tenant was allowed into possession and then made periodic payments of rent while negotiations proceeded on the terms of a lease to be granted to him. The negotiations broke down.
Held: The tenant’s appeal failed. It was inferred . .
Cited – Wandsworth London Borough Council v Singh CA 1991
The Local Authority were lessees of some 500 square metres of public open space at St. Johns Hill in Wandsworth, which they and their horticultural sub-contractors visited periodically. It had been used by local inhabitants for leisure and . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Sinclair Collis Limited HL 7-Jun-2001
The appellants operated a system of placing their vending machines in clubs for the sale of cigarettes. They took as consideration a share of the profits of the cigarettes sold, and, in return, maintained the machines. They claimed that the machines . .
Cited – Wallace v C Brian Barratt and Son Limited and Lock CA 19-Mar-1997
The court was asked whether the defendant company, which was the tenant under an agricultural tenancy agreement of land comprising arable fields, was in breach of a covenant in the tenancy not to assign, underlet, or part with or share possession or . .
Cited – Graysim Holdings Ltd v P and O Property Holdings Ltd HL 24-Nov-1995
A market hall had been let to a tenant under a lease. The tenant fitted out the entire hall with stalls and entered into agreements with the stallholders, by which they paid the tenant a rent and service charge for services provided by the tenant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Media, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219260

British American Tobacco UK Ltd and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: Admn 5 Nov 2004

The claimants challenged the validity of regulations restricting cigarette advertisements, saying that greater exceptions should have been allowed, and that the regulations infringed their commercial right of free speech.
Held: The Regulations were lawful. There was a balance to be found between the need for commercial freedom of speech, and the protection of public health. The secretary of state had a discretion, and could not be criticised in law for drawing the line where he did to restrict advertising of tobacco products.

Judges:

McCombe J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2493 (Admin), Times 11-Nov-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Tobacco Advertising and Promotion (Point of Sale) Regulations 2004, Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act 2002 4(3), European Convention on Human Rights 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Shayler HL 21-Mar-2002
The defendant had been a member of the security services. On becoming employed, and upon leaving, he had agreed to keep secret those matters disclosed to him. He had broken those agreements and was being prosecuted. He sought a decision that the . .
Cite164876d – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v International Transport Roth Gmbh and others CA 22-Feb-2002
The Appellant had introduced a system of fining lorry drivers returning to the UK with illegal immigrants hiding away in their trucks. The rules had been found to be in breach of European law and an interference with their human rights. The . .
Cited – Artegodan v Commission ECFI 26-Nov-2002
ECJ Medicinal products for human use – Community arbitration procedures – Withdrawal of marketing authorisations – Competence – Criteria for withdrawal – Anorectics: amfepramone, clobenzorex, fenproporex, . .
Cited – Criminal proceedings against Walter Hahn ECJ 24-Oct-2002
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bezirksgericht Innere Stadt Wien – Austria. Fisheries – Health policy – Directive 91/493/EEC and Decision 94/356/EC – Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Principle of . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Eastside Cheese Company (a Firm) and R A Duckett and Co Interested CA 1-Jul-1999
The respondent had made an order banning the processing of milk products from the interested party’s farm into cheese products. Cheese manufacturers objected to the order. The order had been held unlawful, and the Secretary of State now appealed. . .
Cited – Vereinigte Familiapress Zeitungsverlags- und vertriebs GmbH v Bauer Verlag ECJ 26-Jun-1997
Europa The application to products from other Member States of national provisions restricting or prohibiting certain selling arrangements is not such as to hinder directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, . .
Cited – Commission v France C-262/02 ECJ 13-Jul-2004
The court was concerned with a national measure prohibiting television advertising for alcoholic drinks, in the case of indirect television advertising resulting from the appearance on screen of advertisements visible during the re-transmission of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Axon, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another Admn 23-Jan-2006
A mother sought to challenge guidelines issued by the respondent which would allow doctors to protect the confidentiality of women under 16 who came to them for assistance even though the sexual activities they might engage in would be unlawful.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Human Rights

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219225

Greene v Associated Newspapers Ltd: CA 5 Nov 2004

The claimant appealed against refusal of an order restraining publication by the respondent of an article about her. She said that it was based upon an email falsely attributed to her.
Held: ‘in an action for defamation a court will not impose a prior restraint on publication unless it is clear that no defence will succeed at the trial. This is partly due to the importance the court attaches to freedom of speech. It is partly because a judge must not usurp the constitutional function of the jury unless he is satisfied that there is no case to go to a jury. The rule is also partly founded on the pragmatic grounds that until there has been disclosure of documents and cross-examination at the trial a court cannot safely proceed on the basis that what the defendants wish to say is not true. And if it is or might be true the court has no business to stop them saying it. ‘
Nothing in section 12(3) of the 1998 Act weakens the force of the rule in Bonnard v Perryman.
As to Human Rights, a person’s right to protect his or her reputation is amongst the rights guaranteed by Art 8. There were two rights in conflict. The court stressed the distinction between a defamation case (where the claimant’s right to a reputation has been put in issue and the issue cannot be effectively resolved before the trial) and a case which raises direct issues of privacy or confidentiality. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke VP, Lord Justice May, Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1462, Times 10-Nov-2004, [2005] QB 972

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 12(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Bonnard v Perryman CA 2-Jan-1891
Although the courts possessed a jurisdiction, ‘in all but exceptional cases’, they should not issue an interlocutory injunction to restrain the publication of a libel which the defence sought to justify except where it was clear that that defence . .
Cited – Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and others HL 14-Oct-2004
On her dismissal from the claimant company, Ms Banerjee took confidential papers revealing misconduct to the local newspaper, which published some. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent any further publication. The defendants argued that the . .
Cited – Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
Cited – Holley, SD and R Trading Limited, Henry Ansbacher and Co Limited, Ansbacher (Jersey) Limited v Smith CA 4-Dec-1997
The motive for a threatened publication, was not relevant, when considering whether to restrain publication beforehand. Sir Christopher Slade said: ‘I accept that the court may be left with a residual discretion to decline to apply the rule in . .
Cited – William Coulson and Sons v James Coulson and Co CA 1887
Lord Esher MR said: ‘It could not be denied that the court had jurisdiction to grant an interim injunction before trial. It was, however, a most delicate jurisdiction to exercise, because, though Fox’s Act only applied to indictments and . .
Cited – Fraser v Evans CA 1969
The law of confidence is based on the moral principles of loyalty and fair dealing. An injunction was sought to restrain an intended publication: ‘The court will not restrain the publication of an article, even though it is defamatory, when the . .
Cited – Bonnard v Perryman QBD 1891
The libel in issue was a very damaging one. Unless it could be justified at the trial it was one in which a jury would give the plaintiff ‘very serious damages’. The court was asked to grant an interlocutory injunction to restrain publication.
Cited – Herbage v Pressdram Ltd CA 1984
There was a publication of articles which referred to convictions which were spent under the 1974 Act. The court restated the principle in Bonnard v Perryman: ‘These principles have evolved because of the value the court has placed on freedom of . .
Cited – Herbage v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 30-Apr-1981
The principles in American Cyanamid did not affect the rule in Bonnard v Perryman. Sir Denys Buckley saiod: ‘the question what meaning the words complained of bore was primarily one for the jury. Suppose the words bore the second meaning alleged and . .
Cited – Polly Peck PLC v Trelford CA 1986
The plaintiffs complained of the whole of one article and parts of two other articles published about them in The Observer. The defamatory sting was that Mr Asil Nadir (the fourth plaintiff) had deceived or negligently misled shareholders, . .
Cited – Khashoggi v IPC Magazines Ltd CA 1986
The plaintiff sought to restrain the publication of an article. The defendants asserted that they would justify what they said at trial by reference to a Polly Peck defence, as to which: ‘I cannot see why the Bonnard v Perryman principle should not . .
Cited – In re F (otherwise A ) (A Minor) (Publication of Information) CA 1977
An allegation of contempt was made in proceedings related to the publication by a newspaper of extracts from a report by a social worker and a report by the Official Solicitor, both prepared after the commencement and for the purpose of the wardship . .
Cited – Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG HL 5-Mar-1975
Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected
The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute.
Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may . .
Cited – Regina v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis, ex parte Rottman HL 16-May-2002
The defendant had been arrested under an extradition warrant issued under the Act. The police had searched his premises, and found further evidence which was used to support the application for extradition. He challenged the collection and admission . .
Cited – Affaire Radio France et autres v France ECHR 30-Mar-2004
A person’s right to protect his/her reputation is among the rights guaranteed by ECHR Article 8 as an element of the right to respect for private life. . .
Cited – Wainwright and another v Home Office HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant and her son sought to visit her other son in Leeds Prison. He was suspected of involvement in drugs, and therefore she was subjected to strip searches. There was no statutory support for the search. The son’s penis had been touched . .
Cited – Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others HL 28-Oct-1999
Fair Coment on Political Activities
The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the . .
Cited – Lonhro Plc and Others v Fayed and Others (No 5) CA 6-Oct-1993
The plaintiff sought to amend a conspiracy claim, based on arrangements to publish defamatory statements, by adding a claim for damage to reputation and feelings.
Held: Such a claim could not be made in conspiracy. A Plaintiff’s motives in . .
Cited – Observer and Guardian v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Nov-1991
The newspapers challenged orders preventing their publication of extracts of the ‘Spycatcher’ book.
Held: The dangers inherent in prior restraints are such that they call for the most careful scrutiny on the part of the court. This is . .
Cited – In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .

Cited by:

Cited – George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd QBD 2-Dec-2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly . .
Cited – Lord Browne of Madingley v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 3-Apr-2007
The appellant sought to restrict publication by the defendants in the Mail on Sunday of matters which he said were a breach of confidence. He had lied to a court in giving evidence, whilst at the same time being ready to trash the reputation of his . .
Cited – Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd and others v Vetplus Ltd CA 20-Jun-2007
The claimants appealed refusal of an order restricting comparative advertising materials for the defendant’s competing veterinary medicine. The claimant said that the rule against prior restraint applicable to defamation and other tort proceedings . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Corporation v CAFCASS Legal and others FD 30-Mar-2007
Parents of a child had resisted care proceedings, and now wished the BBC to be able to make a TV programme about their case. They applied to the court for the judgment to be released. Applications were also made to have a police officer’s and . .
Cited – Westcott v Westcott QBD 30-Oct-2007
The claimant said that his daughter in law had defamed him. She answered that the publication was protected by absolute privilege. She had complained to the police that he had hit her and her infant son.
Held: ‘the process of taking a witness . .
Cited – Clift v Slough Borough Council and Another QBD 6-Jul-2009
The claimant sought damages for defamation. The council had decided that she had threatened a member of staff and notified various people, and entered her name on a violent persons register. She alleged malice, the council pleaded justification and . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 2-Oct-2009
The defendant had published a story in its newspaper. At that time it attracted Reynolds qualified privilege. After the circumstances changed, the paper offered an updating item. That offer was rejected as inadequate.
Held: The qualified . .
Cited – RST v UVW QBD 11-Sep-2009
The applicant sought an interim and without notice injunction preventing the defendant from disclosing confidential information covered by an agreement between the parties.
Held: The order was made on a without notice application because there . .
Cited – Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and Others QBD 11-Apr-2013
The claimant sought an order to restrain anticipated defamatory comments and evidence to be given to an employment tribunal.
Held: It could not be said as the claimant asserted that dfeences were bound to fail, and no determination should be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219207

Vodafone Group Plc v Orange Personal Communications Services Ltd: ChD 1997

The court examined the development of the law in relation to comparative advertising. Jacob J said: ‘Prior to the coming into force of the Trade Marks Act 1994 comparative advertising using a registered trade mark of a competitor was, subject to minor exceptions involving the use of a company name, forbidden by section 4(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1938. But in an increasingly pro-competitive environment there was virtually a moratorium on enforcement of section 4(1) rights in a number of trades – for instance comparative advertising in the field of motor cars was very common for a number of years before the 1938 Act was repealed. The 1994 Act now positively permits fair competitive advertising by section 10(6). This provides:
‘Nothing in the preceding provisions of this section shall be construed as preventing the use of a registered trade mark by any person for the purpose of identifying goods or services as those of the proprietor or a licensee.
But any such use otherwise than in accordance with honest practices in industrial or commercial matters shall be treated as infringing the registered trade mark if the use without due cause takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark.’
In this case it is common ground that there is no infringement unless the use of Vodaphone in the comparison falls within the qualification of section 10(6). This qualification was considered by Laddie J in Barclays Bank Plc v. Advanta [1996] RPC 307. He held that it is for the plaintiff to show that the use falls within the qualification and that the test of honesty is objective (ie. would a reasonable reader be likely to say, upon being given the full facts, that the advertisement is not honest?). Laddie J gave as an example the case where the advertisement is ‘significantly misleading’. In trade marks, as [Counsel] rightly submitted, there is no ‘one meaning rule’. If a comparison is significantly misleading on an objective basis to a substantial proportion of the reasonable audience, it is not an ‘honest practice’ within the section.’
‘The meaning of the words concerned is the first matter to be considered, for their truth or falsity is to be tested against that meaning. The meaning is for the court to determine when a judge sits without a jury. Evidence of the meaning to others is inadmissible. The question: ‘is not one of construction in the legal sense. The ordinary man does not live in an ivory tower and he is not inhibited by the rules of construction. So he can and does read between the lines in the light of his general knowledge and experience of worldly affairs . . What the ordinary man would infer without special knowledge has generally been called the natural and ordinary meaning of the words. But that expression is rather misleading in that it conceals the fact that there are two elements in it. Sometimes it is not necessary to go beyond the words themselves, as where the plaintiff has been called a thief or a murderer. But more often the sting is not so much in the words themselves as in what the ordinary man will infer from them, and that is also regarded as part of their natural and ordinary meaning’, per Lord Reid in Lewis v The Daily Telegraph’
Jacob J discussed obiter the application of the ‘one meaning rule’ in malicious falsehood cases: ‘As a comparative stranger to this branch of the law I find the ‘one meaning rule’ strange, particularly for malicious falsehood. Without authority, I should have thought it would be enough to satisfy the criterion of falsity for the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made a statement which was false to a substantial number of people. That, for instance, is the position in passing off (a tort also concerned with false representations): for that tort it is enough to show that the representation fools some of the people, even if not most of them.
The reason for the libel rule in part relates to the entitlement of jury trial for libel (as Diplock L.J. explained in Slim). Save in exceptional circumstances the right to jury trial remains for libel and slander (see section 69(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1981) but there is no such right in relation to malicious falsehood. So it by no means follows that that historical reason for the rule in libel should apply to malicious falsehood. Another reason for the rule relates to the function of a jury in awarding damages for defamation: unless one has settled on a particular meaning one cannot judge the extent of the defamation. But in malicious falsehood damages are rather different: they are essentially compensatory for pecuniary loss as for most other torts. So again it does not seem necessarily to follow that the libel rule should apply to the tort. However, as I say, the parties were agreed that I should proceed on the basis that I am a notional jury identifying the single meaning of the words complained of. That is what I will do, and, as will be seen, in this case the point is academic.’
Jacob J looked at the question of meaning in marketing cases: ‘This is a case about advertising. The public are used to the ways of advertisers and expect a certain amount of hyperbole. In particular the public are used to advertisers claiming the good points of a product and ignoring others, . . and the public are reasonably used to comparisons- ‘knocking copy’ as it is called in the advertising world. This is important in considering what the ordinary meaning may be. The test is whether a reasonable man would take the claim being made as one made seriously, the more precise the claim the more it is likely to be so taken- the more general or fuzzy the less so.’

Judges:

Jacob J

Citations:

[1997] FSR 34, [1997] EMLR 84

Statutes:

Trade Marks Act 1994 10(6), Supreme Court Act 1981 69(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Barclays Bank Plc v RBS Advanta ChD 8-Feb-1996
A party complaining about the use of a trade mark in a comparative advert is required to show some dishonesty. Section 10(6) of the Act was described as ‘home grown’ rather than derived directly from the Directive. . .

Cited by:

Cited – British Airways Plc v Ryanair Limited ChD 25-Oct-2000
The claimant alleged that disparaging adverts by the defendant infringed its trade marks and amounted to the tort of malicious falsehood.
Held: There was no dispute that the mark had been used. The Act could not be used to prevent any use of . .
Cited – Cable and Wireless plc v British Telecommunications plc ChD 1998
The court set out the applicable legal principles in trade mark infringement. The court considered the elements necessary to establish a defence under s10(6): The primary objective of section 10(6) of the 1996 Act is to permit comparative . .
Cited – Quinton v Peirce and Another QBD 30-Apr-2009
One election candidate said that another had defamed him in an election leaflet. Additional claims were made in injurious falsehood and under the Data Protection Act.
Held: The claim in defamation failed. There were no special privileges in . .
Cited – Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe Sas v Asda Stores Ltd QBD 15-Jul-2009
The claimant said that the defendant’s characterisation of its own products as ‘Good for You’ by reference to a description saying that it did not include the claimant’s product as a component, was a malicious falsehood. The defendant sold other . .
Approved – MacMillan Magazines Ltd v RCN Publishing 1998
Neuberger J approved the statement of Jacob J as to comparative marketing. . .
Cited – Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe Sas v Asda Stores Ltd CA 2-Jun-2010
The claimant sold a sweetener ingredient. The defendant shop advertised its own health foods range with the label ‘no hidden nasties’ and in a situation which, the claimant said, suggested that its ingredient was a ‘nasty’, and it claimed under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Media, Defamation

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.221000

HM Attorney General v Times Newspaper, Kelsey and Leppard: CA 19 Jan 2001

Previous proceedings had been settled by an undertaking given by the newspaper to refrain from publishing certain material subject to provisos. It later sought a variation, the terms of which were not agreed by the Attorney General. It was then learned that the material was to be published in Russia.
Held: The matter came on as an urgent appeal but would require full argument, and an immediate order was refused.

Judges:

Waller LJ, Robert Walker LJ, Mance LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 38

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Media, Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.217935

Peakviewing (Interactive) Ltd and others v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport: CA 28 Nov 2002

The Secretary of State had refused to grant a certifate as to a file under the 1985 Act thus disallowing certain capital allowances. The Rules said that a decision of the High Court would be final.

Judges:

Kennedy, Jonathan Parker LJJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1864

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Films Act 1985 Sch 1, Supreme Court Act 1981 16(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – CS v ACS and Another FD 16-Apr-2015
Rule Against Appeal was Ultra Vires
W had applied to have set aside the consent order made on her ancillary relief application accusing the husband of material non-disclosure. She complained that her application to have the order varied had been refused on the ground that her only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Media, Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.217857

Cityfibre Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Advertising Standards Authority Ltd and Another: Admn 15 Apr 2019

Challenge by way of judicial review to decision of the defendants set out in a letter to the claimant that advertisements referring to part-fibre broadband services as ‘fibre’ broadband services are unlikely to mislead consumers.

Judges:

Murray J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 950 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Consumer, Media

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.636091

Affaire Radio France et autres v France: ECHR 30 Mar 2004

A person’s right to protect his/her reputation is among the rights guaranteed by ECHR Article 8 as an element of the right to respect for private life.

Citations:

53984/00, [2007] ECHR 127, (2005) 40 EHRR 29

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Cited by:

Cited – Greene v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant appealed against refusal of an order restraining publication by the respondent of an article about her. She said that it was based upon an email falsely attributed to her.
Held: ‘in an action for defamation a court will not impose . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd QBD 2-Dec-2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly . .
Cited – Mardas v New York Times Company and Another QBD 17-Dec-2008
The claimant sought damages in defamation. The US publisher defendants denied that there had been any sufficient publication in the UK and that the court did not have jurisdiction. The claimant appealed the strike out of the claims.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 19 June 2022; Ref: scu.211495

PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: SC 19 Jul 2017

No anonymity for investigation suspect

The claimant had been investigated on an allegation of historic sexual abuse. He had never been charged, but the investigation had continued with others being convicted in a high profile case. He appealed from refusal of orders restricting publication of his name and involvement in the inquiry.
Held: (Kerr and Wilson LL dissenting) The appeal failed. PNM did not seek that the trial should be conducted in such a way as to protect his identity, but to restrict its reporting, however fair or accurate, of certain matters which were discussed at a public trial. These were not matters in respect of which PNM can have had any reasonable expectation of privacy. There would be an undoubted and possible serious effect on PNM’s family: ‘But whether that be so or not, the impact on PNM’s family life of what was said about him at the trial is no different in kind from the impact of many disagreeable statements which may be made about individuals at a high profile criminal trial. A defendant at such a trial may be acquitted, possibly on an issue of admissibility, after bruising disclosures have been made about him at the trial. Within the limits of professional propriety, a witness may have his integrity attacked in cross-examination. He may be accused by other witnesses of lying or even of having committed the offence himself. All of these matters may be exposed in public under the cloak of the absolute immunity of counsel and witnesses from civil liability, and reported under the protection of the absolute privilege from liability for defamation for fair, accurate and contemporaneous publication. The immunity and the privilege reflect the law’s conviction that the collateral impact that this process has on those affected is part of the price to be paid for open justice and the freedom of the press to report fairly and accurately on judicial proceedings held in public.’
Lords Kerr and Wilson said that the asserted prresumption that members of the public would understand that a person arrested but not charged should be presumed innocent, was without authority and: ‘against the public interest that the proposed piece about section 4(2) would be considerably more engaging and meaningful, this court needed first to recognise the risk to PNM that his identification would generate a widespread belief not only that he was guilty of crimes which understandably attract an extreme degree of public outrage but also that he had so far evaded punishment for them; and then, in consequence, to balance the risk of profound harm to the reputational, social, emotional and even physical aspects of his private and family life, notwithstanding that he is presumed by the law to be innocent and has had no opportunity to address in public the offences of which at one time the police suspected him to be guilty.
At the end of this only interim inquiry, our view is that the scales have descended heavily in favour of PNM’s rights under article 8; that he was likely to have established his right to an injunction against identification at full trial; and, with great respect to our colleagues, that they are wrong today to be dismissing his appeal.’
Lord Sumption said: ‘A party is entitled to invoke the right of privacy to protect his reputation but, as I have explained, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to proceedings in open court. The only claim available to PNM is based on the adverse impact on his family life which will follow indirectly from the damage to his reputation. It is clear that in an action for defamation no injunction would issue to prevent the publication of a fair and accurate report of what was said about PNM in the proceedings. It would be both privileged and justified. In the context of the publication of proceedings in open court, it would be incoherent for the law to refuse an injunction to prevent damage to PNM’s reputation directly, while granting it to prevent the collateral impact on his family life in precisely the same circumstances.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 49, [2017] WLR(D) 490, [2017] EMLR 29, [2017] 3 WLR 351, UKSC 2014/0270, [2019] AC 161, [2017] WLR(D) 673, [2018] 1 Cr App R 1

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD (490), SC, SC Summary, SC Video Summary, SC Video 17/01/2017 am, SC Video 17/01/2017 pm, SC Video 18/01/2017 am, WLRD

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 4(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At first instance – PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others QBD 22-Oct-2013
The claimant had been arrested on allegations of serious child sex abuse. The court now considered an application for a continuation or cancellation of an interim non-disclosure order.
Held: The application for a non-disclosure order was . .
Appeal from – PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others CA 1-Aug-2014
The claimant sought a privacy order after being accused of historical serious sexual offences against children.
Held: The judge had properly acted within the range of his discretion, and the appeal was dismissed. The judgment would however . .
Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
Cited – B v The United Kingdom; P v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Apr-2001
The procedures in English law which provided for privacy for proceedings involving children did not in general infringe the human right to family life, nor the right to a public hearing. Where relatives more distant than immediate parties were . .
Cited – Regina v Socialist Worker Printers and Publishers Ltd, Ex parte Attorney-General CA 1974
In a blackmail case, the court ordered non publication of the names of the complainants. Thinking they were not bound, the defendants published the names.
Held: The publishers and Mr Michael Foot were held to be in contempt of court in . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd HL 1-Feb-1979
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to . .
Cited – Doorson v The Netherlands ECHR 26-Mar-1996
Evidence was given in criminal trials by anonymous witnesses and evidence was also read as a result of a witness having appeared at the trial but then absconded. The defendant was convicted of drug trafficking. As regards the anonymous witnesses, . .
Cited – V v The United Kingdom; T v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Dec-1999
The claimant challenged to the power of the Secretary of State to set a tariff where the sentence was imposed pursuant to section 53(1). The setting of the tariff was found to be a sentencing exercise which failed to comply with Article 6(1) of the . .
Cited – In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
Cited – In re Guardian News and Media Ltd and Others; HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010
Proceedings had been brought to challenge the validity of Orders in Council which had frozen the assets of the claimants in those proceedings. Ancillary orders were made and confirmed requiring them not to be identified. As the cases came to the . .
Cited – Edmonton Journal v Alberta (Attorney General) 1989
Supreme Court of Canada – The court made orders for anonymisation of parties to proceedings to protect them from from embarrassment or humiliation.
Wilson J said: ‘It is difficult to imagine a guaranteed right more important to a democratic . .
Cited – Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
Cited – Independent Publishing Company Limited v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago, The Director of Public Prosecutions PC 8-Jun-2004
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The newspapers had been accused of contempt of court having reported matters in breach of court orders, and the editors committed to prison after a summary hearing: ‘In deciding whether . .
Cited – Von Hannover v Germany ECHR 24-Jun-2004
Princess Caroline of Monaco who had, at some time, received considerable attention in the media throughout Europe, complained at the publication of photographs taken of her withour her permission.
Held: There was no doubt that the publication . .
Cited – Trinity Mirror and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Croydon Crown Court CACD 1-Feb-2008
The defendant had pleaded guilty in the Crown Court to 20 counts of making or possessing child pornography. No direction was made for withholding the defendant’s identity in court, but the Crown Court made an order in the interest of the defendant’s . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999: Application By the British Broadcasting Corporation To Set Aside or Vary a Reporting Restriction Order HL 17-Jun-2009
An application was made to discharge an anonymity order made in previous criminal proceedings before the House. The defendant was to be retried for rape under the 2003 Act, after an earlier acquittal. The applicant questioned whether such a order . .
Cited – A v British Broadcasting Corporation (Scotland) SC 8-May-2014
Anonymised Party to Proceedings
The BBC challenged an order made by the Court of Session in judicial review proceedings, permitting the applicant review to delete his name and address and substituting letters of the alphabet, in the exercise (or, as the BBC argues, purported . .
Cited – Regina (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jan-2016
The applicant was a convicted murderer who had been held in a high security mental hospital. His application for unescorted leave had been refused, and he wished to challenge the decisions. Anonymity in the subsequent proceedings had been refused to . .
Cited – BG and Others v HMTQ 7-Oct-2002
Supreme Court of British Columbia. The Court prohibited, until the conclusion of the proceedings, identification of school staff accused of abusing boys in an action brought by them in later life against the school.
Held: The protection of . .
Cited – BG and Others v HMTQ in Right of BC 22-Jun-2004
Court of Appeal fro British Columbia – Teachers had been accused of historical sexual abuse. An order was made for their anonymisation pending conclusion of those civil proceedings. The proceedings had now been dismissed. The Court now considered . .
Cited – Regina v Henry 26-Feb-2009
British Columbia – Court of Appeal – The Court had granted permission to Mr Henry to reopen his appeal against conviction for offences of sexual assault. His case was to be that Mr X, who had already been convicted of other assaults, had instead . .
Cited – Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council v M and Others FC 25-Oct-2016
Rotherham had made a teenage girl a ward of court and had obtained interim injunctions that four named men should not associate with her. It alleged that they had been sexually exploiting her. None of the four came to be charged with any offence but . .

Cited by:

Cited – NT 1 and NT 2 v Google Llc QBD 13-Apr-2018
Right to be Forgotten is not absolute
The two claimants separately had criminal convictions from years before. They objected to the defendant indexing third party web pages which included personal data in the form of information about those convictions, which were now spent. The claims . .
Cited – Richard v The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and Another ChD 18-Jul-2018
Police suspect has outweighable Art 8 rights
Police (the second defendant) had searched the claimant’s home in his absence in the course of investigating allegations of historic sexual assault. The raid was filmed and broadcast widely by the first defendant. No charges were brought against the . .
Cited – Sarker, Regina v CACD 13-Jun-2018
The defendant was to face trial under the 2006 Act. He applied for an order under section 4(2) of the 1981 Act postponing the reporting of the proceedings on the grounds that knowledge by the jury of the inquiry and police investigation would be . .
Cited – ZXC v Bloomberg Lp CA 15-May-2020
Privacy Expecation during police investigations
Appeal from a judgment finding that the Defendant had breached the Claimant’s privacy rights. He made an award of damages for the infraction of those rights and granted an injunction restraining Bloomberg from publishing information which further . .
Cited – Gallagher v Gallagher (No 1) (Reporting Restrictions) FC 13-Jun-2022
Private Hearings are Not in Secret
H sought an order restricting reporting of the divorce financial remedy proceedings, or an anonymity order.
Held: The application was refused save as to identification of the children, and certain tax matters. The a hearing was listed as in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Human Rights, Information, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.590447

Griffiths v Tickle and Others: CA 10 Dec 2021

Appeal against a decision of the High Court that a fact-finding judgment in proceedings under the Children Act 1989 should be published with the names of the father and the mother included, and only relatively modest redactions, primarily aimed at mitigating the impact of publication on the couple’s infant child. The appellant is the father, against whom findings were made. He accepts that the judgment can be published but contends that the interests of the child make it necessary that he, the mother, and the child should all be anonymised and that there should be additional redaction of some details.
Dame Victoria Sharp PQBD said: ‘But the firmly established starting point in the domestic jurisprudence is the principle of open justice. The general rule is that proceedings are held in public and what is said, including the names of the parties and witnesses, can be observed and reported. In a case which involves the ‘determination’ of criminal liability or civil rights and obligations, Article 6 confers on each party to litigation the right to a public hearing and a public judgment.’

Judges:

Dame Victoria Sharp,
(President of the Queen’S Bench Division),
Lady Justice King,
And,
Lord Justice Warby

Citations:

[2021] EWCA Civ 1882

Links:

Bailii, Judiciary

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Gallagher v Gallagher (No 1) (Reporting Restrictions) FC 13-Jun-2022
H sought an order restricting reporting of the divorce financial remedy proceedings, or an anonymity order.
Held: The application was refused save as to identification of the children, and certain tax matters. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Media

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.670460

V v C: CA 20 Sep 2001

Application for order that hearing to be held in private.
Held: It would not be reported until after a forthcoming related criminal trial.

Judges:

Brooke, Waller, Longmore LJJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1424

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Media

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201359

HM Attorney General v Times Newspaper and others: CA 25 Jan 2001

The AG sought to restrain publication by the defendant of extracts from a book written by a former member of the security services and was expected to reveal confidential materials

Judges:

Lord Philips MR, Tuckey, Longmore LJJ

Citations:

[2001] EMLR 19, [2001] 1 WLR 885, [2001] EWCA Civ 97

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Media

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200750

Mersey Care NHS Trust, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and others: Admn 22 Jul 2004

Proceedings before the Mental Health Review Tribnal had been very nearly all held in private. The patient, Ian Brady sought to have his hearing in public.
Held: Beatson J approved the Tribunal’s reasons forfind that their privacy rules were a proper and proportionate departure from the principle of open justice and thus compatible with article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights:
‘By definition the issues which the mental health review tribunal has to deal with involve personal and clinical confidential information affecting individuals who are often very vulnerable and not always in a position to make an informed decision as to what may or may not be in their best interests. Questions of capacity may frequently arise and clinical progress may be affected by the consequences of publicity.’

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2005] 1 WLR 2469, [2004] EWHC 1749 (Admin), [2005] 2 All ER 820

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 78, Mental Health Review Tribunal Rules 1983, Administration of Justice Act 1960 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Pickering v Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Newspapers plc HL 1991
Damages were awarded for a breach of statutory duty where the claimant had suffered loss or damage by reason of the breach. The publication at issue went beyond reporting and ‘it reached deeply into the substance of the matter which the court had . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jan-2016
The applicant was a convicted murderer who had been held in a high security mental hospital. His application for unescorted leave had been refused, and he wished to challenge the decisions. Anonymity in the subsequent proceedings had been refused to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199832

Bacardi-Martini SAS v Television Francaise 1 SA (TF1) and others: ECJ 13 Jul 2004

ECJ Grand Chamber – Article 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 49 EC) – Directive 89/552/CEE – Television without frontiers – Television broadcasting – Advertising – National measure prohibiting television advertising for alcoholic drinks marketed in that Member State, in the case of indirect television advertising arising from the appearance on screen of hoardings visible during the transmission of sporting events – ‘Loi Evin’

Judges:

V Skouris, P

Citations:

C-429/02, [2004] ECR I-6613, [2004] EUECJ C-429/02

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 89/552/CEE, EC Treaty 59

Jurisdiction:

European

European, Media

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199461

Pearle and others v Hoofdbedrijfschap Ambachten: ECJ 15 Jul 2004

ECJ State aid – Definition of aid – Collective advertising campaigns in favour of one sector of the economy – Financing by means of a special contribution payable by undertakings in that sector – Action taken by a body governed by public law

Citations:

C-345/02, [2004] EUECJ C-345/02

Links:

Bailii

European, Media

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199457

Taylor v Rive Droite Music Ltd: ChD 6 Jul 2004

The claimant music producer and songwriter had entered into a publishers agreement with the defendant, agreeing to work for it. He now sought to be free to work for another company. The factual background was unclear, and the contract documentation self contradictory as to its term.
Held: The court had first to try to read the conflicting clauses together. The court was able to do that, but considered what other rules of construction could be used, including trying to find the clause which best expressed the true intent of the agreement. On the issue of where the copyright in a song resided, the court held that the copyright in earlier versions of songs created during the terms vested in the defendant in accordance with the contract, and that copyright was infringed by development of later versions without the defendant’s licence.

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1605 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 16(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Pagnan SpA v Tradax Ocean Transportation SA 1986
When asked to interpret a contract with apparently conflicting provisions, the duty of the court is ‘to reconcile seemingly inconsistent provisions if that result can conscientiously and fairly be achieved’. . .
Cited – Goldmile Properties Limited v Speiro Lechouritis CA 29-Jan-2003
The tenant claimed damages form his landlord for breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment. The landlord was obliged to repair the building, and in his doing so the tenant suffered losses through interruptions. The question was whether the Landlord . .
Cited – Pagnan SpA v Tradax Ocean Transportation S.A. CA 2-Jan-1987
When looking at different clauses in a contract, there would obviously be an inconsistency if two clauses cannot ‘sensibly’ be read together. . .
Cited – Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
Cited – HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited v New Hampshire Insurance Company Independent Insurance Company Limited Axa Reinsurance S A CA 21-May-2001
A claim was made under a re-insurance policy which supported film finances. The re-insurers resisted the claim on the grounds of misrepresentation. Rix LJ: ‘In principle it would seem to me that it is always admissible to look at prior contracts as . .
Cited – Yien Yieh Commercial Bank Ltd v Kwai Chung Cold Storage Co Ltd PC 1989
The Board was asked as to how conflicting provisions within a contract should be read and reconciled: ‘Their Lordships wish to stress that to reject one clause in a contract as inconsistent with another involves a rewriting of the contract which can . .
Cited – Saunderson v Piper 27-May-1839
Where there is an inconsistency in a contract between written words expressing a number and the same number expressed in figures, the written number will usually prevail. . .
Cited – Homburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (the ‘Starsin’) HL 13-Mar-2003
Cargo owners sought damages for their cargo which had been damaged aboard the ship. The contract had been endorsed with additional terms. That variation may have changed the contract from a charterer’s to a shipowner’s bill.
Held: The specific . .
Cited – Walker v Giles 1848
The court sought to reconcile conflicting parts of a deed.
Wilde CJ said: ‘And as the different parts of the deed are inconsistent with each other, the question is, to which part effect ought to be given. There is no doubt, that, applying the . .
Cited – Modern Building Wales Ltd v Limmer and Trinidad Co Ltd CA 1975
Where a contract incorporates by reference the terms of another document, the incorporating contract will usually prevail over the terms of document incorporated.
Buckley LJ said, ‘if any of the imported terms in any way conflict with the . .
Cited – Slingsby’s Case 1587
Where two inconsistent provisions in a deed cannot be reconciled, the earlier provision prevails over the later. . .
Cited – Forbes v Git HL 1922
If there are conflicting provisions in a deed and they cannot be reconciled, the court may apply as a last resort the ancient rule of thumb that the earlier provision prevails over the later one. . .
Cited – Martin v Martin 1987
A property was bought by parties as ‘beneficial joint tenants in equal shares’.
Held: The words ‘in equal shares’ had the effect of severing any joint tenancy created by the first words of the phrase. The law would apply the first of two . .
Cited – D B Ramsden and Co Ltd v Nurdin and Peacock Plc and Another ChD 14-Sep-1998
The tenant overpaid rent, including a payment in May 1997 on advice that the payment would be recoverable following litigation establishing that it was an overpayment. The court later held that the payments in question were indeed overpayments. The . .
Cited – LA Gear Inc v Hi-Tec Sports plc 1992
The court considered at what point a work would constituted a finished work, and how this related to the copyright in earlier forms of the work: ‘If, in the course of producing a finished drawing, the author produces one or more preliminary . .
Cited – Thompson v Asda MFI Group Plc 1988
The court considered the implication of a term which would prevent an employer selling a subsidiary so that employees of the subsidiary who had rights under the group share option scheme ceased to be employees for the purpose of that agreement. It . .
Cited – Little v Courage Ltd ChD 19-Jan-1994
The pub tenant had an option to renew his lease, subject to agreeing with the brewer a business plan and agreement. He notified the landlord that he wished to renew but the landlord did not himself present any plan and agreement, or obtain one, but . .
Cited – Inchbald v Western Neilgherry Coffee, Tea and Cinchona Plantation Co Ltd 1864
The damages for breach of contract for prevention of the fulfilment of a condition will take into account the chance that, irrespective of the breach of contract, the condition would not have been fulfilled anyway. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Media, Intellectual Property

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198641

British Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd: CA 7 May 1980

Lord Denning MR said that the Norwich Pharmacal case opened ‘a new chapter in our law’ and ‘Mr Irvine suggested this was limited to cases where the injured person desired to sue the wrongdoer. I see no reason why it should be so limited. The same procedure should be available when he desires to obtain redress against the wrongdoer – or to protect himself against further wrongdoing.’
Templeman LJ: ‘In my judgment the principle of the Norwich Pharmacal case applies whether or not the victim intends to pursue action in the courts against the wrongdoer provided that the existence of a cause of action is established and the victim cannot otherwise obtain justice. The remedy of discovery is intended in the final analysis to enable justice to be done. Justice can be achieved against an erring employee in a variety of ways and a plaintiff may obtain an order for discovery provided he shows that he is genuinely seeking lawful redress of a wrong and cannot otherwise obtain redress. In the present case BSC state that they will not finally determine whether to take legal proceedings or whether to dismiss the employee or whether to obtain redress in some other lawful manner until they have considered the identity, status and excuses of the employee. The disclosure of the identity of the disloyal employee will by itself protect BSC and their innocent employees now and for the future and is essential if B.S.C. are to redress the wrong.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Templeman LJ

Citations:

[1981] 1 All ER 435

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Norwich Pharmacal Co and others v Customs and Excise Commissioners HL 26-Jun-1973
Innocent third Party May still have duty to assist
The plaintiffs sought discovery from the defendants of documents received by them innocently in the exercise of their statutory functions. They sought to identify people who had been importing drugs unlawfully manufactured in breach of their . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – British Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd HL 7-May-1980
The defendant had broadcast a TV programme using material confidential to the plaintiff, who now sought disclosure of the identity of the presumed thief.
Held: (Lord Salmon dissenting) The courts have never recognised a public interest right . .
Cited – Ashworth Security Hospital v MGN Limited HL 27-Jun-2002
Order for Journalist to Disclose Sources
The newspaper published details of the medical records of Ian Brady, a prisoner and patient of the applicant. The applicant sought an order requiring the defendant newspaper to disclose the identity of the source of material which appeared to have . .
Cited – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 1) Admn 21-Aug-2008
The claimant had been detained by the US in Guantanamo Bay suspected of terrorist involvement. He sought to support his defence documents from the respondent which showed that the evidence to be relied on in the US courts had been obtained by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Contempt of Court, Litigation Practice

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.193375

Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Castelli: QBD 14 Aug 1995

An applicant, who was HIV positive, wished his identity to be concealed.
Held: Some publicity had already occurred A Contempt of Court anonymity order was not to be used to protect a litigant’s privacy.

Judges:

Latham J

Citations:

Times 14-Aug-1995, [1995] 7 Admin LR 840

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd HL 1-Feb-1979
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte T, a Firm of Solicitors Admn 25-Jun-1997
The firm of solicitors making an application for judicial review of the decision of the Board to institute criminal proceedings against them sought anonymity, saying that procedure which might prove them innocent would nevertheless damage their . .
Cited – Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Kaim Todner (a Firm of Solicitors) CA 10-Jun-1998
Limitation on Making of Anonymity Orders
A firm of solicitors sought an order for anonymity in their proceedings against the LAB, saying that being named would damage their interests irrespective of the outcome.
Held: The legal professions have no special part in the law as a party . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.88298

Clarkson v Information Commissioner (The Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009): FTTGRC 1 Feb 2013

Request properly rejected as for material held for journalistic purposes. Struck out.

Judges:

NJ Warren

Citations:

[2013] UKFTT EA – 2012 – 0258 (GRC

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

The Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information, Media

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.517850

Editions Plon (Societe) v France: ECHR 18 May 2004

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 10 with regard to the interim injunction ; Violation of Art. 10 with regard to the permanent injunction ; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings ; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

58148/00, (2006) 42 EHRR 36, [2004] ECHR 200

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Associated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales CA 21-Dec-2006
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient . .
Cited – TSE and ELP v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 23-May-2011
The claimants had obtained an injunction preventing publication of details of their private lives and against being publicly named. The newspaper had not attempted to raise any public interest defence. Various publications had taken place to breach . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196979

Telewest Communications Plc v The Commissioners of Customs and Excise: ChD 19 Dec 2003

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Ferris

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 3176 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Telewest Communications Plc Telewest (Publications) Limited v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 10-Feb-2005
The taxpayers sold cable services which were liable to VAT through 28 subsidiaries, and supplied by a third party as part of the same service a listings magazine. They sought exemption from VAT for that part of the consideration related to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Media

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189918

Cine Bes Filmcilik Ve Yapimcilik and Another v United International Pictures and Others: CA 21 Nov 2003

The parties entered into agreements licensing the exclusive distribution of encrypted television channels within Turkey. A clause provided a calculation of damages for a breach amounting to the balance of licence fees due, and other penalties, including the return of proprietary rights. On a breach the licensors sought to enforce the contract. On an application for summary judgment, the judge refused to accept as arguable a suggestion that the clause was a penalty.
Held: The judge was wrong to focus on only one element of the damages clause, and to grant summary judgment. There was a triable issue as to whether the clause was a penalty. However, a particular clause might be commercially justifiable provided that its dominant purpose was not to deter the other party from breach. There are clauses which may operate on breach, but which fall into neither category and may be commercially justifiable and therefore enforceable.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mance, Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Thomas

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1669, [2004] 1 CLC 401

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd HL 1-Jul-1914
The appellants contracted through an agent to supply tyres. The respondents contracted not to do certain things, and in case of breach concluded: ‘We agree to pay to the Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company, Ltd. the sum of 5 l. for each and every tyre, . .
Approved – Lordsvale Finance Plc v Bank of Zambia QBD 20-Mar-1996
The court looked at a facility agreement opened by a bank in favour of the defendant which provided that in the event of default the defendant should pay interest during the period of default at an aggregate rate equal to the cost to the bank of . .
Cited – Workers Trust and Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd PC 22-Feb-1993
(Jamaica) The purchaser at an auction had been obliged under the terms of the auction contract to pay a deposit of 25%. He failed to complete, and the vendor took the deposit by way of forfeit. The standard deposit payable would be 10%. The Court of . .
Cited – Philips (Hong Kong) Ltd v The Attorney General of Hong Kong PC 9-Feb-1993
After referring to two Australian cases on penalty clauses in contracts: ‘These statements assist by making it clear that the court should not adopt an approach to provisions as to liquidated damages which could, as indicated earlier, defeat their . .
Cited – Robophone Facilities Ltd v Bank CA 1966
Parties to a contract should be free to stipulate not only primary obligations and rights but also the secondary rights and obligations, ie those which arise upon non-performance of any primary obligation by one of the parties to the contract, but . .
Cited – Oresundsvarvet AB v Marcos Diamantis Lemos (The ‘Angelic Star’) CA 1988
As part of a contract for ship-building, a delivery credit was made available to the purchaser as an ‘option’, in default of exercise of which the full price was payable in cash. The option was taken. The loan was to be repaid by bills of exchange . .

Cited by:

Cited – Murray v Leisureplay Plc QBD 5-Aug-2004
The claimant sought payment of three years’ salary after termination of his service contract. He said that an agreement had been made by the company to purchase a ‘financial institution’, which would trigger the additional payments. The defendants . .
Cited – Euro London Appointments Ltd v Claessens International Ltd CA 6-Apr-2006
The court considered whether a clause in an employment agency’s terms and conditions amounted to a penalty and was unenforceable. The contract provided that if the offer was withdrawn by the eventual employer after acceptance but before the . .
Cited – Tullett Prebon Group Ltd v El-Hajjali QBD 31-Jul-2008
The defendant signed an employment contract to join the claimants as a senior broker. He changed his mind and decided to stay in his existing job. The new employers sued for breach of contract. The defendant said that the claimants had refused to . .
Cited – Azimut-Benetti Spa (Benetti Division) v Healey ComC 3-Sep-2010
The claimant sought summary judgment under a guarantee. The defendant said that the liquidated damages clause under which the claim was made was a penalty clause and unenforceable.
Held: The request for summary judgment was granted.
Cited – Parkingeye Ltd v Beavis CA 23-Apr-2015
The appellant had overstayed the permitted period of free parking in a retail park by nearly an hour. The parking was managed by the respondent who had imposed a charge of 85.00 pounds. The judge had found that the appellant was in breach of a . .
Cited – Cavendish Square Holding Bv v Talal El Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis SC 4-Nov-2015
The court reconsidered the law relating to penalty clauses in contracts. The first appeal, Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, raised the issue in relation to two clauses in a substantial commercial contract. The second appeal, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Contract

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188048

Todd v Crown Prosecution Service; T v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another; Todd v DPP: QBD 6 Oct 2003

The defendant had been under 18 at the commencement of proceedings but attained 18 during them. The newspaper was granted leave to refer to him by name upon his becoming 18.
Held: Denying the appeal. The balance between the freedom of the press and the protection of youths had to be maintained properly. Once the purpose of the protection had passed, it should not be applied. The purpose of the legislation was not to protect the interests of young persons after they ceased to be young persons.

Judges:

Brooke LJ, Sullivan J

Citations:

Times 13-Oct-2003, [2003] EWHC 2408 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Webster and Others v Ridgeway Foundation School QBD 5-Feb-2010
The claimant had been severely injured when attacked at school. He was a white youth, and his attackers all Asian. The school had a history of inter-racial tension, and he claimed in negligence, and that they had failed to protect his human right . .
Cited – Webster and Others v The Governors of the Ridgeway Foundation School QBD 21-May-2009
The first claimant had been severely beaten as he left school. He and his parents also claimed post traumatic stress. They alleged that the school had been negligent in having allowed racial tensions to develop. The claimant was white, and his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Media, Crime

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187195

Sarah Lloyd Jones and others v T Mobile (Uk) Ltd: CA 31 Jul 2003

The claimant challenged a stautory notice. The Act required the notice to be fixed to the structure in question, but because of its location, the notice was not legible without going on to private land.
Held: Appeal lay here from the County Court on a preliminary decision on the law to the Court of appeal not the high court.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke Mr Justice Holman Lord Justice Kennedy

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1162, Times 10-Sep-2003, Gazette 16-Oct-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Telecommunications Act 1984, Access to Justice Act 1999 (Destination of Appeals) Order 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Tanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald, Cameron-MacDonald CA 12-May-2000
The court gave detailed guidance on the application of the new procedures on civil appeals in private law cases introduced on May 2. Appeals from a County Court District Judge’s final decision in a multi-track case could now go straight to the Court . .
Cited – Price v Price (Trading As Poppyland Headware) CA 26-Jun-2003
The claimant sought damages from his wife for personal injuries. He had been late beginning the claim, and it was served without particulars. He then failed to serve the particulars within 14 days. Totty and then Sayers had clarified the procedure . .
Cited – Beck v Ministry of Defence CA 11-Jun-2003
The claimant in a personal injury action was examined for a medical report on behalf of the defendants. The defendants, being unhappy with the report sought a second examination, and were granted leave. The claimant now appealed that leave.
Cited – Dermot Gerard Richard Walsh v Andre Martin Misseldine CA 29-Feb-2000
The claimant sought damages for injuries from 1989. His claim was pursued effectively, but a four-year delay ensued after 1994. He then sought to enlarge his claim greatly by introducing a lot of new issues of which the defendant’s insurers had no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Planning

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185236

Murphy v Ireland: ECHR 10 Jul 2003

A pastor attached to an evangelical protestant centre based in Dublin wished to broadcast an advertisement during the week before Easter 1995, but the broadcast was stopped by the Independent Radio and Television Commission because section 10(3) of the Radio and Television Act 1988 prohibited the broadcasting of any advertisement directed towards any religious or political end or having any relation to an industrial dispute. The applicant applied for judicial review against the Commission and the attorney general, but failed in the High Court and the Supreme Court. A bill was introduced in the Dail to amend section 10(3) of the 1988 Act, but the amending bill never became law. The Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands opposed the amendment, noting the great power of the radio and television media, but resisting the proposal that Commission officials should distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable advertisements. He pointed to the difficulty of framing a selective ban and to the distinction between religious advertising and advertising for goods and services. When the Irish government introduced its own bill, section 10(3) was largely preserved but was extended to digital and other broadcasting services.
Held: Member states enjoyed a wider margin of appreciation in relation to matters of morals and religion as compared with restrictions on political speech or debate on matters of public interest. The potential impact of the medium was an important factor in assessing the proportionality of an interference, and audio-visual media have a more immediate and powerful effect than the print media. The court paid attention to the peculiar characteristics and sensitivity of religious broadcasting, but noted that the prohibition concerned only the audio-visual media: these, as the applicant, the government and the court all agreed, had a more immediate, invasive and powerful impact than other media, but the applicant was free to advertise the same matter in any of the print media, or at public meetings and other assemblies. Moreover the prohibition applied only to advertising. The applicant retained the same right as any other citizen to participate in programmes on religious matters, but advertising tended to be partial, and was not subject to the broadcaster’s duty of impartiality, so that the purchase of advertising time would lean in favour of unbalanced usage by religious groups with larger resources. The court considered these (para 75) to be highly relevant reasons justifying the Irish state’s prohibition.

Citations:

44179/98, [2003] ECHR 352, (2003) 38 EHRR 212, (2004) 38 EHRR 13

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Distinguished – VGT Verein Gegen Tierfabriken v Switzerland ECHR 28-Jun-2001
The applicant association dedicated itself to the protection of animals, from animal experiments and industrial animal production. In reaction to television commercials broadcast by the meat industry it prepared a TV advertisement contrasting the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Animal Defenders International, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport HL 12-Mar-2008
The applicant, a non-profit company who campaigned against animal cruelty, sought a declaration of incompatibility for section 321(2) of the 2003 Act, which prevented adverts with political purposes, as an unjustified restraint on the right of . .
Cited – Gaunt v OFCOM and Liberty QBD 13-Jul-2010
The claimant, a radio presenter sought judicial review of the respondent’s finding (against the broadcaster) that a radio interview he had conducted breached the Broadcasting Code. He had strongly criticised a proposal to ban smokers from being . .
Cited – Core Issues Trust v Transport for London Admn 22-Mar-2013
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision made by TfL not to allow an advertisement on behalf of the Trust to appear on the outside of its buses. It was to read: ‘NOT GAY! EX-GAY, POST-GAY AND PROUD. GET OVER IT!’. The decision was said to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184412

Schellenberg v British Broadcasting Corporation: QBD 2000

The claimant had settled defamation actions against the Guardian and the Sunday Times on disadvantageous terms, when it seemed likely that he was about to lose. He then pressed on with this almost identical action against the BBC.
Held: A court may strike out a defamation claim as abuse of process if there is evidence that no proper advantage will flow to the claimant for pursuing it. The court rejected the submission that he should not do so as this would deprive the claimant of his ‘constitutional right’ to trial by jury: ‘I see no reason why such cases require to be subjected to a different pre-trial regime. It is necessary to apply the overriding objective even in those categories of litigation and in particular to have regard to proportionality. Here there are tens of thousands of pounds of costs at stake and several weeks of court time. I must therefore have regard to the possible benefits that might accrue to the claimant as rendering such a significant expenditure potentially worthwhile.’ The overriding objective’s requirement for proportionality meant that he was bound to ask whether ‘the game is worth the candle’: ‘I am afraid I cannot accept that there is any realistic prospect of a trial yielding any tangible or legitimate advantage such as to outweigh the disadvantages for the parties in terms of expense, and the wider public in terms of court resources.’

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2000] EMLR 296, [1999] EWHC 851 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Thoday v Thoday CA 1964
The court discussed the difference between issue estoppel, and action estoppel: ‘The particular type of estoppel relied upon by the husband is estoppel per rem judicatam. This is a generic term which in modern law includes two species. The first . .
Cited – Bradford and Bingley Building Society v Seddon and Hancock; Walsh and Rhodes (Trading As Hancocks (a Firm) CA 11-Mar-1999
There was an unsatisfied judgment on a claim by a defendant in an earlier action against a third party. In a subsequent action against the defendant the latter issued third party proceedings against the original and different third parties.
Cited – Arnold v National Westminster Bank Plc HL 1991
Tenants invited the court to construe the terms of a rent review provision in the sub-underlease under which they held premises. The provision had been construed in a sense adverse to them in earlier proceedings before Walton J, but they had been . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wallis v Valentine and Others CA 18-Jul-2002
The claimant in a defamation case appealed a decision to strike out his claim on the basis that it was an abuse of process, being intended to act as an harassment of the defendant, or to cause commercial embarrassment or undue cost.
Held: . .
Cited – Howe and Co v Burden QBD 11-Feb-2004
Defence of consent – no strike out. The precise ambit of the defence of consent in a defamation case is best established at trial on the basis of the tribunal’s findings of fact. . .
Cited – Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel CA 3-Feb-2005
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable
The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US . .
Approved – Wallis v Valentine and others CA 5-Mar-2002
The court dismissed an appeal by the claimant against the striking out of his claim as an abuse of process. That was an extreme case where the judge had found that even if the claimant succeeded his damages would be very modest, perhaps nominal, and . .
Cited – Adelson and Another v Associated Newspapers QBD 19-Feb-2008
Complaint was made that an article was defamatory of the owner of Manchester United. The defendant now argued that the game was not worth the candle. The costs vastly exceeded any possible recovery, and it had openly offered vindication, and that . .
Cited – Mardas v New York Times Company and Another QBD 17-Dec-2008
The claimant sought damages in defamation. The US publisher defendants denied that there had been any sufficient publication in the UK and that the court did not have jurisdiction. The claimant appealed the strike out of the claims.
Held: The . .
Cited – Kaschke v Gray and Another QBD 23-Jul-2010
The claimant sought damages in defamation saying that the defendants had published a web page which falsely associated her with a terrorist gang in the 1970s. The defendants now sought a strike out of her claim as an abuse saying that a similar . .
Cited – Cammish v Hughes QBD 20-Apr-2012
The defendant disputed whether the words complained of were defamatory, and whether the action was an abuse as being ‘not worth the candle’. The parties were in opposition over a proposed development of a biomass plant.
Held: The court found . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Defamation

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182077

Pippig Augenoptik GmbH and Co. KG v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 8 Apr 2003

ECJ Judgment – Approximation of laws – Directives 84/450/EEC and 97/55/EC – Misleading advertising – Conditions for comparative advertising to be lawful

Citations:

C-44/01, [2003] EUECJ C-44/01, [2003] ECR I-3095, [2004] All ER (EC) 1156, [2004] 1 CMLR 39

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 84/450/EEC, Directive 97/55/EC

Cited by:

Cited – Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Independent Reviewer of Advertising Standards Authority Adjudications Admn 10-Nov-2014
The two supermarkets had price matching comparison schemes. Sainburys complained that the Independent Reviewer’s decsion that the ASA’s response to is complant as to the Tesco scheme was itself flawed. They had complained that the selections for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Media

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180814

Her Majesty’s Attorney General v Punch Limited and another: HL 12 Dec 2002

A former MI5 agent, Mr Shayler, was to be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act, and an injunction against publication was granted. The respondent published further works by Mr Shayler, and now appealed a finding that it had acted in contempt of court.
Held: The appeal failed. The purpose of the interlocutory injunction was not merely to protect secret information, but was more to hold the position until a court had properly decided that issue. Accordingly a publication contrary to the injunction interfered with the administration of justice and was a contempt. It pre-empted the decision which a court might later make. It remained a contempt even if the information did not threaten security.
Lord Hope of Craighead spoke of the liability of a third party for contempt: ‘it has . . to be shown there was an intention on his part to interfere with or impede the administration of justice. This is an essential ingredient, and it has to be established to the criminal standard of proof.’
Lord Nicholls said: ‘Contempt of court is the established, if unfortunate, name given to the species of wrongful conduct which consists of interference with the administration of justice. It is an essential adjunct of the rule of law.
Interference with the administration of justice can take many forms. In civil proceedings one obvious form is a wilful failure by a party to the proceedings to comply with a court order made against him. By such a breach a party may frustrate, to greater or lesser extent, the purpose the court sought to achieve in making the order against him . .
The form of contempt asserted by the Attorney General in the present case is different, although closely related. Sometimes the purpose a court seeks to achieve in making an order against a party to proceedings may be deliberately impeded or prejudiced by the conduct of a third party. This may take more than one form. The third party may be assisting, that is, aiding and abetting, a breach of the order by the person against whom the order was made. Then he is an accessory to the breach of the order . .
Aiding and abetting a breach of the order by the person specifically restrained by the order is not always an essential ingredient of ‘third party’ contempt. The purpose of a court in making an order may be deliberately frustrated by a third party even though he is acting independently of the party against whom the order was made. An interlocutory order for the non-disclosure of information is the paradigm example of the type of order where this principle is in point. The Spycatcher litigation is the best known recent instance of this. It is a contempt of court by a third party, with the intention of impeding or prejudicing the administration of justice by the court in an action between two other parties, himself to do the acts which the injunction restrains the defendant in that action from committing if the acts done have some significant and adverse affect on the administration of justice in that action: see Lord Brandon of Oakbrook in Attorney General v Times Newspapers Ltd . . and, for the latter part, Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ in Attorney General v Newspaper Publishing plc [1997] 1 WLR 927, 936. Lord Phillips MR neatly identified the rationale of this form of contempt, at [2001] QB 1028, 1055, paragraph 87:
‘The contempt is committed not because the third party is in breach of the order – the order does not bind the third party. The contempt is committed because the purpose of the judge in making the order is intentionally frustrated with the consequence that the conduct of the trial is disrupted.’

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craighead

Citations:

[2003] 1 All ER 289, [2003] HRLR 14, [2003] EMLR 7, Times 13-Dec-2002, [2002] UKHL 50, [2002] UKHL 43, [2003] 2 WLR 49, [2003] 1 AC 1046

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Steen v Her Majesty’s Attorney General; Attorney-General v Punch Ltd and Another CA 23-Mar-2001
The appellant appealed against a finding of contempt of court at common law as regards a report in Punch published when he had been its editor.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The A-G had failed to establish the mens rea of contempt in the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Belize Alliance of Conservation Non-Governmental Organisations v Department of the Environment and Another (No 2) PC 13-Aug-2003
(Belize) The applicants sought an interim order preventing continuation of the building of a dam, saying that the environmental damage had not been properly aanticipated.
Held: The Board of the Council did have power to grant an interim . .
Cited – HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc HL 21-Jun-2006
The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. . .
Cited – X and Y v Persons Unknown QBD 8-Nov-2006
The claimants sought an injunction against unknown persons who were said to have divulged confidential matters to newspapers. The order had been served on newspapers who now complained that the order was too uncertain to allow them to know how to . .
Cited – Cala Homes (South) Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another CA 27-May-2011
The respondent had circularised local authorities to say that when assessing future local housing needs a proper material consideration was the proposed Localism Bill which would lead to the replacement of ‘Regional Spatial Strategies’ on which such . .
Cited – Hutcheson v Popdog Ltd and Another CA 19-Dec-2011
The claimant had obtained an injunction to prevent the defendant publishing private materials regarding him. That injunction had been continued by consent but was no challenged by a third party news publisher.
Held: Leave to appeal was . .
Cited – Rhodes v OPO and Another SC 20-May-2015
The mother sought to prevent a father from publishing a book about her child’s life. It was to contain passages she said may cause psychological harm to the 12 year old son. Mother and son lived in the USA and the family court here had no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178416

Hunt, Regina (on the Applicaton of) v Independent Television Commission and Another: Admn 6 Nov 2002

Complaint had been made as to the applicant’s report of the ‘cash for questions’ affair. The journalist complained that his appeal against the respondent’s decision had not satisfied their responsibilities under the Act.

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 2296 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Broadcasting Act l990 6(3)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178024

Linhart v Hans Biffl: ECJ 24 Oct 2002

ECJ Approximation of laws – Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 28 EC and 30 EC) – Directive 76/768/EEC relating to cosmetic products – Directive 84/450/EEC concerning misleading advertising – National legislation laying down restrictions on advertising.

Judges:

J-P. Puissochet, P

Citations:

C-99/01, [2002] EUECJ C-99/01

Links:

Bailii

European, Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177830

Frisbee v Campbell: CA 14 Oct 2002

The claimant sought an account against her former employee for the disclosures made by her of their activities. The respondent had signed a confidentiality agreement. The respondent counterclaimed for assault. She now appealed from dismissal of her appeal against the summary judgment entered against her, arguing that the judge was wrong to dismiss her case as unarguable, since the contract was repudiated by the claimant’s own violent and other misconduct. The claimant argued that a confidentiality clause within an employment context survived any repudiation, and no public policy applied to justify the disclosure.
Held: Whilst the defendant might not expect to succeed, it could not be said that her case was unarguable and the case was not appropriate for summary judgement. The existence of the Press Code engaged the defendants rights of free expression. Those rights were not absolute, and were to be seen with a balance including also the claimant’s privacy rights. Whilst the defendant was not to be encouraged to persist, the case was not so unarguable as to be properly dismissed in a summary procedure: ‘We consider that it is arguable that a duty of confidentiality that has been expressly assumed under contract carries more weight, when balanced against the right of freedom of expression, that a duty of confidence than is not buttressed by express agreement’

Judges:

Lord Justice Keene, Lord Justice Chadwick, Lord Phillips MR

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1374, [2003] ICR 141

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – General Billposting Company Limited v Atkinson HL 1908
The employers had dismissed their employee manager ‘in deliberate disregard of the terms of the contract’ in such a way as ‘to evince an intention no longer to be bound by the contract.’ The manager had successfully brought an action for wrongful . .
Appeal from – Campbell v Frisbee ChD 14-Mar-2002
The defendant appealed a summary judgement on the claimant’s claim with respect to her alleged disclosure of details Miss Campbell’s private life. The claimant sought an action for account of profits for breach of the terms of a contract of service. . .

Cited by:

Cited – McKennitt and others v Ash and Another QBD 21-Dec-2005
The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures.
Held: . .
Cited – Associated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales CA 21-Dec-2006
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient . .
Cited – Caterpillar Logistics Services (UK) Ltd v Huesca De Crean QBD 2-Dec-2011
The claimant sought an order to prevent the defendant, a former employee, from misusing its confidential information said to be held by her. Her contract contained no post employment restrictions but did seek to control confidential and other . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Employment, Intellectual Property, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177804

Jockey Club v Buffham: QBD 13 Sep 2002

A court had issued a final order with an injunction against the respondent against revealing matters becoming known to him during his employment by the claimant. The BBC sought a variation to allow it to broadcast material based upon that documents held by the defendant.
Held: A final order was not binding against third parties. Once the proceedings had concluded, and a final order made, those proceedings could not be prejudiced, and the law of contempt no longer applied. The BBC was not bound by the injunction.

Judges:

Gray J

Citations:

[2003] QB 462, Times 04-Oct-2002, Gazette 17-Oct-2002, [2002] EWHC 1866 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Attorney-General v Times Newspapers Ltd HL 1991
Injunctions had been granted to preserve the status quo in proceedings brought to prevent the publication of the book ‘Spycatcher’. The defendants published extracts, and now appealed a finding that they had acted in contempt.
Held: The . .
Cited – Steen v Her Majesty’s Attorney General; Attorney-General v Punch Ltd and Another CA 23-Mar-2001
The appellant appealed against a finding of contempt of court at common law as regards a report in Punch published when he had been its editor.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The A-G had failed to establish the mens rea of contempt in the . .

Cited by:

Cited – X and Y v Persons Unknown QBD 8-Nov-2006
The claimants sought an injunction against unknown persons who were said to have divulged confidential matters to newspapers. The order had been served on newspapers who now complained that the order was too uncertain to allow them to know how to . .
Cited – Hutcheson v Popdog Ltd and Another CA 19-Dec-2011
The claimant had obtained an injunction to prevent the defendant publishing private materials regarding him. That injunction had been continued by consent but was no challenged by a third party news publisher.
Held: Leave to appeal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media, Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177311

Venables and Another v News Group Papers Ltd and Others: FD 4 Mar 2019

The claimant had been convicted as a child of a murder. An order had been made protecting his identity. He had subsequently been convicted of further offences, but a review of the order in 2010 had rejected a substantial release of the order. Further application was now made.
Held: Rejected.

Judges:

Sir Andrew McFarlane President of the Family Division

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 494 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.634812

Gaetan Seneque and Jacques David v The Director of Public Prosecutions: PC 24 Jul 2002

PC (Mauritius) – The applicants had been charged under the Code of publishing a false news story of a nature to disturb the public peace.
Held: To make out the charge, the prosecution had to show that the public peace was likely to be disturbed. It was not enough to establish that the story was false and that the author was highly critical of the government. It had also to be shown that there was indeed some threat to public order which would arise from the story, though it was not necessary to show any actual breach of public order. There was no such evidence in this case, and the appeal was allowed.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Steyn, Lord Hutton Lord Millett and Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Citations:

Times 23-Aug-2002, [2002] UKPC 42

Links:

PC, Bailii, PC

Statutes:

Mauritius Criminal Code 229(1)(b)

Commonwealth, Crime, Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174727

Carlton Communications Plc, Granada Media Plc v The Football League: ComC 1 Aug 2002

The applicants sought a declaration that they had not provided guarantees to support a contract between a joint venture company owned by them, OnDigital, and the respondent to screen football matches. The company had become insolvent.
Held: The applicants had indicated in the initial bid document that they would guarantee the bid, but that guarantee had not been incorporated into the later documents. OnDigital was not able to bind the claimants. The bid had been renegotiated and reformulated before being signed. A guarantee had to be in writing, and the initial statement had been superceded. Subject to contract negotiations remain in negotiation until a formal contract is concluded. A company is not the agent of its shareholders. A declaration that the claimants had not guaranteed the contract was granted.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Langley

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1650 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Statute of Frauds 1677 4

Citing:

Cited – Tiverton Estates Ltd v Wearwell Ltd CA 1975
“Subject to Contract” not to be diluted
‘subject to contract’ proposals remain in negotiation until a formal contract is executed. Lord Denning MR said: ‘for over a hundred years, the courts have held that the effect of the words ‘subject to contract’ is that the matter remains in . .
Cited – Salomon v A Salomon and Company Ltd HL 16-Nov-1896
A Company and its Directors are not same paersons
Mr Salomon had incorporated his long standing personal business of shoe manufacture into a limited company. He held nearly all the shares, and had received debentures on the transfer into the company of his former business. The business failed, and . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Football League Ltd v Edge Ellison (A Firm) ChD 23-Jun-2006
The claimants operated football leagues, and asked the defendant solicitors to act in negotiating the sale of television rights to ONdigital. The broadcasts went ahead, but no guarantees were taken for the contract. The claimants alleged . .
Cited – Golden Ocean Group Ltd v Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd and Another ComC 21-Jan-2011
The defendants sought to set aside orders allowing the claimants to serve proceedings alleging repudiation of a charterparty in turn allowing a claim against the defendants under a guarantee. The defendant said the guarantee was unenforceable under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Media, Company

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174428

Bonnick v Morris, The Gleaner Company Ltd and Allen: PC 17 Jun 2002

(Jamaica) The appellant sought damages from the respondent journalists in defamation. They had claimed qualified privilege. The words alleged to be defamatory were ambiguous.
Held: The publishers were protected by Reynolds privilege. The court should give the article the natural and ordinary meaning which would be attributed by an intelligent reader seeing it once. He could read between the lines but may not be unduly suspicious.
An appellate court should not disturb the judge’s finding without real justification. That did not apply here.
As to privilege, qualified privilege need not be lost because of unanticipated ambiguity. The defamatory imputation was a matter of implication, about which different views could apply. Responsible journalism was the point at which a fair balance was held between freedom of expression on matters of public concern and the reputations of individuals. Nevertheless ambiguity can be a screen behind which a journalist could be ‘willing to wound, and yet afraid to strike’. It is a matter for the words in each case. In this case the ambiguity was not so patent. There was, or perhaps should be, a deterrent element in the amount of damages in defamation cases.
Lord Nicholls discussed the single meaning rule in defamation: ‘The ‘single meaning’ rule adopted in the law of defamation is in one sense highly artificial, given the range of meanings the impugned words sometimes bear: see the familiar exposition by Diplock LJ in Slim v Daily Telegraph Ltd [1968] 2 QB 157, 171-172. The law attributes to the words only one meaning, although different readers are likely to read the words in different senses. In that respect the rule is artificial. Nevertheless, given the ambiguity of language, the rule does represent a fair and workable method for deciding whether the words under consideration should be treated as defamatory. To determine liability by reference to the meaning an ordinary reasonable reader would give the words is unexceptionable.’
For the purposes of determining whether, in the context of a defamation action, a journalist had acted responsibly, it was permissible to take account of the meaning which a journalist thought an article had even though that is different from the meaning which the article had to the ordinary reasonable reader. ‘A journalist should not be penalised for making a wrong decision on a question of meaning on which different people might reasonably take different views.’ In that case ‘the defamatory meaning of the words used was not so glaringly obvious that any responsible journalist would be bound to realise this was how the words would be understood by ordinary, reasonable readers.’

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote and Mr Justice Tipping

Citations:

[2002] UKPC 31, [2003] 1 AC 300, [2002] 3 WLR 820, 12 BHRC 558, [2002] EMLR 37, [2002] 2 Lloyds Rep 403, (2002) 12 BHRC 558, [2002] All ER (D) 92, (2003) 4 CHRLD 35

Links:

Bailii, PC

Citing:

Cited – Skuse v Granada Television CA 30-Mar-1993
The claimant complained that the defendant had said in a television programme that he had failed to act properly when presenting his expert forensic evidence in court in the trial of the Birmingham Six.
Held: The court should give to the . .
Cited – Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others HL 28-Oct-1999
Fair Coment on Political Activities
The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the . .
Cited – Slim v Daily Telegraph Ltd CA 1968
Courts to Settle upon a single meaning if disputed
The ‘single meaning’ rule adopted in the law of defamation is in one sense highly artificial, given the range of meanings the impugned words sometimes bear. The law of defamation ‘has passed beyond redemption by the courts’. Where in a libel action . .

Cited by:

Cited – George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd QBD 2-Dec-2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly . .
Cited – Nail and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd and others CA 20-Dec-2004
The claimant appealed the award of damages in his claim for defamation. The defendants had variously issued apologies. The claimant had not complained initially as to one publication.
Held: In defamation proceedings the damage to feelings is . .
Cited – Jameel and Another v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl (No 2) CA 3-Feb-2005
The claimant sought damages for an article published by the defendant, who argued that as a corporation, the claimant corporation needed to show special damage, and also that the publication had qualified privilege.
Held: ‘It is an established . .
Cited – Armstrong v Times Newspapers Ltd and David Walsh, Alan English CA 29-Jul-2005
The claimant sought damages after publication by the first defendant of articles which it was claimed implied that he had taken drugs. The paper claimed qualified privilege, and claimed Reynolds immunity.
Held: The defence of qualified . .
Cited – Lowe v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 28-Feb-2006
The defendant sought to defend the claim for defamation by claiming fair comment. The claimant said that the relevant facts were not known to the defendant at the time of the publication.
Held: To claim facts in aid of a defence of fair . .
Cited – Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl HL 11-Oct-2006
The House was asked as to the capacity of a limited company to sue for damage to its reputation, where it had no trading activity within the jurisdiction, and as to the extent of the Reynolds defence. The defendants/appellants had published an . .
Cited – Roberts and Another v Gable and others CA 12-Jul-2007
The claimants appealed a finding of qualified privilege in their claim of defamation by the defendant author and magazine which was said to have accused them of theft and threats of violence against other members of the BNP.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Bray v Deutsche Bank Ag QBD 12-Jun-2008
A former employee of the defendant bank sued in defamation after the bank published a press release about its results which he said was critical of him.
Held: Where there is a real issue as to whether the words are defamatory of the claimant, . .
Cited – Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 24-Jul-2008
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and . .
Cited – Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe Sas v Asda Stores Ltd QBD 15-Jul-2009
The claimant said that the defendant’s characterisation of its own products as ‘Good for You’ by reference to a description saying that it did not include the claimant’s product as a component, was a malicious falsehood. The defendant sold other . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 2-Oct-2009
The defendant had published a story in its newspaper. At that time it attracted Reynolds qualified privilege. After the circumstances changed, the paper offered an updating item. That offer was rejected as inadequate.
Held: The qualified . .
Cited – British Chiropractic Association v Dr Simon Singh CA 1-Apr-2010
The defendant appealed against a ruling that the words in an article – ‘This organisation is the respectable face of the chiropractic profession and yet it happily promotes bogus treatments’ – were statements of fact, and were not comment.
Cited – Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe Sas v Asda Stores Ltd CA 2-Jun-2010
The claimant sold a sweetener ingredient. The defendant shop advertised its own health foods range with the label ‘no hidden nasties’ and in a situation which, the claimant said, suggested that its ingredient was a ‘nasty’, and it claimed under . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 13-Jul-2010
The claimant police officer complained of an article he said was defamatory in saying he was being investigated for allegations of accepting bribes. The article remained on the internet even after he was cleared. Each party appealed interim orders. . .
Cited – Watkins v Woolas QBD 5-Nov-2010
The petitioner said that in the course of the election campaign, the respondent Labour candidate had used illegal practices in the form of deliberately misleading and racially inflammatory material.
Held: The claim succeeded, and the election . .
Cited – Baturina v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 23-Mar-2011
The claimant appealed against directions given in her defamation action against the defendant. It had been said that she owned a house, and the defendant said that this was not defamatory. The claimant said that as the wife of the Mayor of Moscow . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd SC 21-Mar-2012
The defendant had published an article which was defamatory of the claimant police officer, saying that he was under investigation for alleged corruption. The inquiry later cleared him. The court was now asked whether the paper had Reynolds type . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Commonwealth, Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174490

McManus and others v Beckham: CA 4 Jul 2002

The claimant sought damages from the defendant who was a pop star, and had vociferously, publicly, and wrongly accused the claimant of selling pictures with fake autographs of her husband. The defendant obtained an order striking out the claim on the ground that the defendant was not responsible for repetitions of the slander by others.
Held: It was not possible to dispose of the republication issue at the interlocutory stage. Much would depend on the findings of the jury, in the light of appropriate directions. Whether the defendant was so responsible was a matter eventually for a jury to decide. She might be found liable if her own fame was such that she expected or should reasonably expect anything extraordinary which she said in public, to be reported. The striking out was set aside. It would be a question of fact for each case. ‘The reality is that the court has to decide whether, on the facts before it, it is just to hold [the defendant] responsible for the loss in question’.
Waller LJ said: ‘What the law is trying to achieve in this area is a just and reasonable result by reference to the position of a reasonable person in the position of the defendant. If a defendant is actually aware (1) that what she says or does is likely to be reported, and (2) that if she slanders someone that slander is likely to be repeated in whole or in part, there is no injustice in her being held responsible for the damage that the slander causes via that publication. I would suggest further that if a jury were to conclude that a reasonable person in the position of the defendant should have appreciated that there was a significant risk that what she said would be repeated in whole or in part in the press and that that would increase the damage caused by the slander, it is not unjust that the defendant should be liable for it. Thus I would suggest a direction along the above lines rather than by reference to ‘foreseeability’.’
Laws LJ said: ‘It will not however in my judgment be enough to show that D’s slander is a cause of X’s further publication: for such a cause might exist although D could have no reason to know of it; and then to hold D responsible would not be just. This is why the old formulae, ‘natural and probable cause,’ is inapt even as a figurative description of the relationship that needs to be shown between D’s slander and the further publication D is to be held liable for the latter. It must rather be demonstrated that D foresaw that further publication would probably take place, or that D (or a reasonable person in D’s position) should have so foreseen and that in consequence increased damage to C ‘would ensue’.
Such an approach, I hope, may go some modest distance to demythologise the law of defamation. I make it clear that I intend what I had said to be in conformity with Waller LJ’s suggestion at the end of his judgment as to how a jury might be directed, though with difference to him I think that any avoidance of the term ‘foreseeability’ is commended by the need for clarity rather than adherence to principle, for in principle the approach he proposes, and for what its worth my own reasoning, require that the damage in question flowing from X’s act be foreseen or foreseeable by D or the reasonable person in D’s position’

Judges:

Lord Justice Waller, Lord Justice Clarke and Lord Justice Laws

Citations:

Times 11-Jul-2002, Gazette 12-Sep-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 939, [2002] 1 WLR 2982, [2002] 4 All ER 497

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Slipper v British Broadcasting Corporation CA 1990
The plaintiff, a retired policeman was featured in a film about the Great Train Robbery. He sought to say that paper reviews of the film, and trailers worked to spread the libel, and should count in the assessment of damages against the defendant, . .
Explained – Ward v Weeks 1830
Complaint was made as to the publication of defamatory words addressed to one Bryce who ‘without any authority from the defendant’ repeated the same to Bryer. It was the repetition and not the original statement which ‘occasioned the Plaintiffs . .

Cited by:

Cited – Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3) CA 18-May-2005
The principal claimants sold the rights to take photographs of their wedding to a co-claimant magazine (OK). Persons acting on behalf of the defendants took unauthorised photographs which the defendants published. The claimants had retained joint . .
Cited – Budu v The British Broadcasting Corporation QBD 23-Mar-2010
The defendant sought to strike out the claimant’s action in defamation. It had reported that the police had withdrawn an employment offer to claimant after doubting his immigration status.
Held: The claims should be struck out. The articles . .
Cited – Baturina v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 31-Mar-2010
The claimant sought damages in defamation in respect of an article published by the defendant newspaper. She was the wife of the Mayor of Moscow, and was required to disclose on a public list assets held by her. The defendant said that she owned a . .
Cited – Hays Plc v Hartley QBD 17-May-2010
Mr Hartley operated a news agency, and provided to the publisher of the Sunday Mirror, MGN Ltd, allegations of racism that had been levelled at the claimant company by former employees. The allegations were reported in an article headed ”KKK . .
Cited – Lewis v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis and Others (Rev 1) QBD 31-Mar-2011
The defendant sought a ruling on the meaning of the words but using section 69(4) of the 1981 Act. The claimant solicitor was acting in complaints as to the unlawful interception of celebrity voicemails by agents of the press. There had been debate . .
Cited – S v Suren and Another QBD 10-Sep-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Media, Damages

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174189

HIH Casualty And General Insurance Limited and Others v The Chase Manhattan Bank and Others: CA 31 Jul 2001

Parties syndicating finance for a film obtained the security of an insurance which is designed to pay up to the sum insured, if the revenues generated by the film were insufficient to repay the loan finance plus associated expenses. The polices were supported by a ‘truth of statement’ policy, and the issue was the extent to which that applied as between the insurers and their own re-insurers.

Judges:

Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Rix And Mr Justice Lloyd

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1250, [2001] 2 Lloyds Law Reports 161

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd and Others v Chase Manhattan Bank and Others QBD 19-Sep-2000
As a contract for speculation, a duty of utmost good faith is not implied in a contract insurance. The duty of disclosure by an insured can be limited by the contract as can the freedom of the insurance company to avoid liability. If the wording is . .
See also – HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited v New Hampshire Insurance Company Independent Insurance Company Limited Axa Reinsurance S A CA 21-May-2001
A claim was made under a re-insurance policy which supported film finances. The re-insurers resisted the claim on the grounds of misrepresentation. Rix LJ: ‘In principle it would seem to me that it is always admissible to look at prior contracts as . .
Cited – Mark Rowlands v Berni Inns Ltd CA 1985
The plaintiff owned the freehold and had let the basement to the defendant. The plaintiff insured the building. The defendant covenanted to pay to the plaintiff an insurance rent equal to the proportionate cost of insuring the part of the building . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others HL 20-Feb-2003
The insurance company had paid claims on policies used to underwrite the production of TV films. The re-insurers resisted the claims against them by the insurers on the grounds of non-disclosure by the insured, or in the alternative damages for . .
See also – HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited v New Hampshire Insurance Company Independent Insurance Company Limited Axa Reinsurance S A CA 21-May-2001
A claim was made under a re-insurance policy which supported film finances. The re-insurers resisted the claim on the grounds of misrepresentation. Rix LJ: ‘In principle it would seem to me that it is always admissible to look at prior contracts as . .
Cited – Regus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd CA 15-Apr-2008
The appellant had contracted to provide office accomodation to the defendant. The air conditioning did not work and there were other defects. The appellant now challenged a finding of liability and that its contract terms which were said to totally . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171343

Rusbridger and Another v Attorney General: CA 20 Mar 2002

The paper wanted to publish an article about the monarchy but was concerened that it might lead to it being prosecuted under the 1848 Act. The complainant sought declarations as to the incompatibility of the 1848 Act with the 1998 Act.
Held: The defendant had made no decision (other than not to prosecute) and there was no decision to challenge. Whilst the other applications should not proceed, the court considered that the possible incompatibility of the 1848 Act with the Human Rights Act was a proper matter of public interest and might be pursued.

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 397

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Treason and Felony Act 1848 3, Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another HL 26-Jun-2003
Limit to Declaratory Refilef as to Future Acts
The applicant newspaper editor wanted to campaign for a republican government. Articles were published, and he sought confirmation that he would not be prosecuted under the Act, in the light of the 1998 Act.
Held: Declaratory relief as to the . .
Cited – Regina v Mitchel 1848
The judge instructed the jury that advocacy of republicanism was necessarily an offence: ‘There are no two things more inconsistent with each other – no two ideas more opposed to each other – no two expressions more contradictory of each other than . .
Cited – Rex v Charles Gavan Duffy 1848
The defendant was editor of the Irish newspaper ‘The Nation’. He was accused of treason.
Held: The judge summed up the offence of treason under the Act as follows: ‘if any person shall entertain the intention of deposing Her Majesty from her . .
Cited – Regina v A (Complainant’s Sexual History) (No 2) HL 17-May-2001
The fact of previous consensual sex between complainant and defendant could be relevant in a trial of rape, and a refusal to allow such evidence could amount to a denial of a fair trial to a defendant. Accordingly, where the evidence was so relevant . .
Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v Attorney-General HL 1980
The applicant sought a declaration as to the lawfulness of a lottery scheme whilst criminal proceedings were pending against it for the same scheme.
Held: It was not necessary to decide whether a declaration as to the criminality or otherwise . .
Cited – Regina (Pretty) v Director of Public Prosecutions, and Another, Medical Ethics Alliance and Others, interveners Admn 18-Oct-2001
The function of the Director’s office is statutory, and his powers are those laid down. He is not able to excuse possible criminal conduct in advance, and nor could he establish a policy of not applying certain statutory provisions. The Suicide Act . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Able and Others QBD 28-Apr-1983
The Attorney General sought a declaration as to whether it would be the crime of aiding and abetting or counselling and procuring suicide, to distribute a booklet published by the respondent which described various effective ways of committing . .
Cited – Joyce v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1948
The defendant was an American citizen but held a British passport. After the outbreak of war between Great Britain and Germany in 1939, he delivered from German territory broadcast talks in English hostile to Great Britain.
Held: His . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another HL 26-Jun-2003
Limit to Declaratory Refilef as to Future Acts
The applicant newspaper editor wanted to campaign for a republican government. Articles were published, and he sought confirmation that he would not be prosecuted under the Act, in the light of the 1998 Act.
Held: Declaratory relief as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Human Rights, Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170080

Regina (Quintavalle, Prolife Alliance) v British Broadcasting Corporation: CA 14 Mar 2002

The applicant had stood for election, and since there were a sufficient number of candidates for the ProLife Alliance, they sought a party political broadcast. The material they produced was rejected by the respondent and others, as not complying with standards of taste and decency required of all programs.
Held: It was difficult to think of a context in which the claims of free expression were more pressing. The material was indeed shocking, but was uncut and truthful. The obligation to carry the broadcast was statutory. The decision amounted to censorship. The broadcasters had not given sufficient weight to the pressing imperative of free political expression. Freedom of political speech at an election, must not be interfered with save on the most pressing grounds, and only very rarely on considerations of taste and decency alone. The decision could not stand.
Laws LJ explained: ‘The great majority [of abortions] are performed on the third of the five permitted grounds under the Abortion Act 1967 as amended: that is that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman. There is some evidence that many doctors maintain that the continuance of a pregnancy is always more dangerous to the physical welfare of a woman than having an abortion, a state of affairs which is said to allow a situation of de facto abortion on demand to prevail.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Laws and Lord Justice Jonathan Parker

Citations:

Times 19-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 297, [2002] 3 WLR 1080, [2002] 2 All ER 756

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Broadcasting Act 1990 6(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Pro-life Alliance HL 15-May-2003
The Alliance was a political party seeking to air its party election broadcast. The appellant broadcasters declined to broadcast the film on the grounds that it was offensive, being a graphical discussion of the processes of abortion.
Held: . .
Cited – A and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health SC 14-Jun-2017
The court was asked: ‘Was it unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health, the respondent, who had power to make provisions for the functioning of the National Health Service in England, to have failed to make a provision which would have enabled . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Elections, Media

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168044

Al-Fagih v H H Saudi Research and Marketing (UK) Ltd: CA 1 Nov 2001

The media’s right to freedom of expression, particularly in the field of political discussion ‘is of a higher order’ than ‘the right of an individual to his good reputation.’ The majority upheld an appeal against a trial judge’s ruling that the publication in question was not within the protection of Reynolds privilege. ‘Reportage’ is ‘a convenient word to describe the neutral reporting of attributed allegations rather than their adoption by the newspaper’. ‘. . there will be circumstances where . . both sides to a political dispute are being fully, fairly and disinterestedly reported in their respective allegations and responses. In this situation it seems to me that the public is entitled to be informed of such a dispute without having to wait for the publisher, following an attempt at verification, to commit himself to one side or the other’.
Reynolds privilege was made out in respect of the newspaper report of defamatory allegations made in the course of an ongoing political debate, notwithstanding that the publishers had made no attempt to verify the allegations. The newspaper had not adopted or endorsed these allegations.

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1634, [2001] 2 EMLR 215, [2002] EMLR 13, [2001] All ER (D) 48

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Saad Al-Fagih v HH Saudi Research and Marketing (UK) Ltd QBD 28-Jul-2000
The court considered the factors which the court should take into account when carrying out the balancing process with regard to the defence of qualified privilege because of the public interest: ‘Some factors relate to the quality, status and . .
Cited – Lingens v Austria ECHR 8-Jul-1986
Freedom of expression, as secured in paragraph 1 of Article 10, constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each individual’s self-fulfilment. Subject to paragraph 2, . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and The Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Limited CA 13-Feb-2003
The defendants considered publication of alleged financial irregularities by the claimant, who sought to restrain publication. The defendants argued that under the Act, prior restraint should not be used unless a later court would be likely to . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd QBD 2-Dec-2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly . .
Cited – Jameel and Another v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl (No 2) CA 3-Feb-2005
The claimant sought damages for an article published by the defendant, who argued that as a corporation, the claimant corporation needed to show special damage, and also that the publication had qualified privilege.
Held: ‘It is an established . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v The Telegraph Group Ltd CA 25-Jan-2006
The defendant appealed agaiunst a finding that it had defamed the claimant by repeating the contents of papers found after the invasion of Iraq which made claims against the claimant. The paper had not sought to justify the claims, relying on . .
Cited – Charman v Orion Publishing Group Ltd and others QBD 13-Jul-2006
The claimant police officer sought damages from the defendants who had published a book alleging that he had been corrupt. The defendants claimed privilege under Reynolds and the 1996 Act.
Held: The defence of qualified privilege failed. . .
Cited – Roberts and Another v Gable and others CA 12-Jul-2007
The claimants appealed a finding of qualified privilege in their claim of defamation by the defendant author and magazine which was said to have accused them of theft and threats of violence against other members of the BNP.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Curistan v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 30-Apr-2008
The court considered the availability of qualified privilege for reporting of statements made in parliament and the actionable meaning of the article, which comprised in part those statements and in part other factual material representing the . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 2-Oct-2009
The defendant had published a story in its newspaper. At that time it attracted Reynolds qualified privilege. After the circumstances changed, the paper offered an updating item. That offer was rejected as inadequate.
Held: The qualified . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 13-Jul-2010
The claimant police officer complained of an article he said was defamatory in saying he was being investigated for allegations of accepting bribes. The article remained on the internet even after he was cleared. Each party appealed interim orders. . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd SC 21-Mar-2012
The defendant had published an article which was defamatory of the claimant police officer, saying that he was under investigation for alleged corruption. The inquiry later cleared him. The court was now asked whether the paper had Reynolds type . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Defamation

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167796

Allan v Clibbery (1): CA 30 Jan 2002

Save in cases involving children and ancillary and other situations requiring it, cases in the family division were not inherently private. The appellant failed to obtain an order that details of an action under the section should not be disclosed by the media.
Held: The description of the law at first instance was too wide in stating that family proceedings could not, with the exception of children cases, be heard in private. It does not follow alone from the fact that a hearing was in private that there was a ban on reporting it. Family proceedings are not different from other civil proceedings, save in recognised classes of cases, and situations which manifestly required permanent confidentiality. There is no one approach to the balance between the right to family life in article 8 and freedom of expression in article 10 of the Convention.
Whether family proceedings in chambers are protected from publication depends upon whether they come within the 1960 Act or whether the administration of justice will otherwise be impeded or prejudiced by publication.
There is an implied obligation upon a party to whom documents are disclosed in proceedings for ancillary relief not to disseminate them, or copies of them, to third parties without the leave of the court

Judges:

Butler-Sloss P FD LJ, Lord Justice Thorpe, and, Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

Times 05-Feb-2002, Gazette 14-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 45, [2002] Fam 261, [2002] 1 FLR 565, [2002] UKHRR 697

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Law Act 1996 36, Family Proceedings Rules 1991 (1991 No 1247 (L20)) 3.9(1, Administration of Justice Act 1960 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hodgson and others v Imperial Tobacco Limited Gallagher Limited etc CA 12-Feb-1998
A large number of plaintiffs brought actions against the defendants, three tobacco companies, claiming damages for personal injuries by reason of cancer which they claimed was caused by smoking cigarettes manufactured by the defendants. A hearing . .
Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
Appeal from – Clibbery v Allan and Another FD 2-Jul-2001
There is nothing inherently different in Family Division proceedings to justify an implied ban on all disclosures of matters proceeding in chambers. Here no children or other sensitive matters were involved. The simple filing of an affidavit . .

Cited by:

Cited – P v P (Ancillary Relief: Proceeds of Crime) FD 8-Oct-2003
The parties sought guidance from the court on the circumstances which arose in ancillary relief proceedings where a legal representative came to believe that one party might be holding the proceeds of crime. In the course of ancillary relief . .
Cited – Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure) FD 19-Mar-2004
The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings . .
Cited – P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public) FD 2003
The applicant sought a joint residence order, and for a declaration that the rules preventing such hearings being in public breached the requirement for a public hearing.
Held: Both FPR 1991 rule 4.16(7) and section 97 are compatible with the . .
Cited – Pelling v Bruce-Williams, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening CA 5-Jul-2004
The applicant sought an order that his application for a joint residence order should be held in public.
Held: Though there was some attractiveness in the applicant’s arguments, the issue had been fully canvassed by the ECHR. The time had come . .
Cited – Harb v King Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz CA 26-May-2005
The wife sought an order for reasonable maintenance from His Majesty King Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz. He replied that he was immune from suit.
Held: The King as king was immune. The judge at first instance had been wrong to give the case fictitious . .
Cited – Clayton v Clayton CA 27-Jun-2006
The family had been through protracted family law proceedings and had been subject to orders restricting identification. The father now wanted to discuss his experiences and to campaign. He could not do so without his child being identified.
Cited – Norfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 1-Nov-2006
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified.
Held: A judge . .
Cited – LM, Re (Reporting Restrictions; Coroner’s Inquest) FD 1-Aug-2007
A child had died. In earlier civil proceedings, the court had laid responsibility with the mother. Restrictions had been placed on the information which would effectively prevent the coroner conducting his inquest. The coroner sought a lifting of . .
Cited – Child X (Residence and Contact- Rights of Media Attendance) (Rev 2) FD 14-Jul-2009
The father applied to the court to have the media excluded from the hearing into the residence and contact claims relating to his daughter.
Held: It was for the party seeking such an order to justify it. In deciding whether or not to exclude . .
Cited – Gelber v Griffin FD 22-Nov-2006
Complaint was made that a party had disclosed confidential material received through disclosure to a third party.
Held: There was an implied duty of confidence arising in the disclosure process. . .
Cited – Davies v Welch Admn 4-Nov-2010
The applicant sought the committal of the respondent for contempt. The defendant, a solicitor had acted for the claimant’s wife in ancillary relief proceedings. He complained that documents sent to her under implied undertakings of confidentiality . .
Cited – H v A (No2) FD 17-Sep-2015
The court had previously published and then withdrawn its judgment after third parties had been able to identify those involved by pulling together media and internet reports with the judgment.
Held: The judgment case should be published in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Media, Information, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167525

Base Company and Mobistar v Ministerraad: ECJ 11 Jun 2015

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Electronic communications networks and services – Directive 2002/22/EC – Articles 4, 9, 13 and 32 – Universal service obligations and social obligations – Provision of access at a fixed location and provision of telephone services – Affordability of tariffs – Special tariff options – Financing of the universal service obligations – Additional mandatory services – Mobile communication services and/or internet subscription services

Citations:

C-1/14, [2015] EUECJ C-1/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:378

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 2002/22/EC

Jurisdiction:

European

Media

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.548113

Venables and Thompson v News Group International, Associated Newspapers Ltd, MGN Ltd: QBD 4 Dec 2001

An order had been made requiring all newspapers not to publish anything which might lead to the identification of the claimants or their whereabouts. The defendant newspaper published information as to their last known whereabouts. They argued that they did not understand that information about past whereabouts was not covered.
Held: The articles were a clear and serious infringement of the order. Some bits of information were known, but the story as related was not. The accessibility to the general public of Government statistical information is, in the present context, theoretical and not generally accessible to the public, and not in the public domain.

Judges:

The President, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss

Citations:

[2001] EWHC QB 452, [2001] EMLR 255, [2001] EWHC 530 (QB), [2001] All ER (D) 32

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Saltman Engineering Co v Campbell Engineering Co Ltd CA 1948
The plaintiffs instructed the defendant to make tools for the manufacture of leather punches in accordance with drawings which the plaintiffs provided to the defendant for this purpose. The defendant used the drawings to make tools, and the tools to . .
Enforced – Venables and Thompson v News Group Newspapers and others QBD 8-Jan-2001
Where it was necessary to protect life, an order could be made to protect the privacy of individuals, by disallowing publication of any material which might identify them. Two youths had been convicted of a notorious murder when they were ten, and . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and The Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Limited CA 13-Feb-2003
The defendants considered publication of alleged financial irregularities by the claimant, who sought to restrain publication. The defendants argued that under the Act, prior restraint should not be used unless a later court would be likely to . .
Cited – KJO v XIM QBD 7-Jul-2011
The claimant had, some 20 years previously, been convicted and sentenced for forgery of a will. The defendants, relatives, had ever since written to those with whom he had dealings to tell them of the conviction and facts. The claimant, unable to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167291

Interbrew SA v Financial Times Ltd and Others: ChD 19 Dec 2001

The claimant was involved in takeover proceedings. Certain confidential documents were taken, doctored, and released to and published by the defendants who now resisted orders for disclosure of the source.
Held: The court must balance the right of freedom of expression, and the private rights of the claimants. The court should start from an assumption that it would be wrong to order disclosure of the source of a press story, The claimants could succeed only if the disclosure was so important as to override the public interest in protecting journalistic sources in order to ensure free communication of information to and through the press. The damage caused was serious, a criminal offence had been involved, and the claimant had a legitimate need to prevent further such disclosures. The source was to be revealed.

Judges:

Justice Lightman

Citations:

Times 04-Jan-2002, Gazette 27-Feb-2002, [2001] EWHC Ch 471, [2001] EWHC 480 (Ch), [2002] 1 Lloyds Rep 542

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 10, European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Financial Times Ltd and others v Interbrew SA CA 8-Mar-2002
The appellants appealed against orders for delivery up of papers belonging to the claimant. The paper was a market sensitive report which had been stolen and doctored before being handed to the appellant.
Held: The Ashworth Hospital case . .
At first Instance – Financial Times Ltd and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Dec-2009
The claimants said that an order that they deliver up documents leaked to them regarding a possible takeover violated their right to freedom of expression. They complained that such disclosure might lead to the identification of journalistic . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167322

De Coster v College des bourgmestre et echevins de Watermael-Boitsfort: ECJ 29 Nov 2001

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Definition of a national court or tribunal – Freedom to provide services – Municipal tax on satellite dishes – Restriction on the freedom to receive television programmes by satellite

Judges:

P. Jann, P

Citations:

C-17/00, [2001] EUECJ C-17/00, [2002] All ER (EC) 154, [2001] ECR I-944, [2001] ECR I-9445, ECLI:EU:C:2001:651, [2002] 1 CMLR 12

Links:

Bailii

European, Media

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.166996

Chan U Seek v Alvis Vehicles Ltd: ChD 8 Dec 2004

A newspaper, not party to the proceedings, sought access to the Court files, anticipating a significant journalistic story.
Held: Park J allowed the application for copies of certain pleadings and witness statements that had been placed before the court at a hearing in public, even though the application was made after the case had settled. The general principle that the judge applied was that: ‘the courts favour disclosure rather than the withholding of materials if the materials have featured in proceedings in open court.’ In deciding what counted as materials featuring in proceedings in open court he said that: ‘The reference to documents which have been read in open court must, in my view, be regarded as covering the pleadings, and also witness statements which were confirmed in general terms by their makers and which stood as evidence in chief.’

Judges:

Park J

Citations:

[2005] 1 WLR 2965, [2005] EMLR 19, [2005] 3 All ER 155

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Chan U Seek v Alvis Vehicles Ltd ChD 8-May-2003
The claimant appealed a striking out order.
Held: If a claim stood no chance of success, then it should not be allowed to proceed, but where the claim was merely weak it should not be struck out. That would be inconsistent with the needs of . .

Cited by:

Cited – ABC Ltd v Y ChD 6-Dec-2010
There had been proceedings as to the misuse of confidential information. X, a non-party, now sought disclosure of papers used in that case. The case had been settled by means of a Tomlin Schedule, and that, subject to further order, non-parties . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.535110

Regina v London (North) Industrial Tribunal Ex Parte Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 13 May 1998

A tribunal had erred in ordering that names of both complainant and respondent and of witnesses should be protected in a sexual harassment case. The power only exists in respect of the complainant and a ‘person affected’. This group should not be extended. The imposition of general reporting restrictions on a sex discrimination case went beyond range of what was needed to protect the interests identified in the regulations to protect a someone not a party to the proceedings.

Citations:

Gazette 14-Oct-1998, Times 13-May-1998, (1998) IRLR 569

Statutes:

Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 (1993 No 2687) 14

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Media, Employment

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.88544

Tammer v Estonia: ECHR 6 Feb 2001

Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and the self-fulfilment of each individual. Criminal penalties imposed in respect of the reporting of a sexual relationship could not be said to violate Article 10 – notwithstanding that the persons concerned were the Prime Minister and a political aide.

Citations:

41205/98, (2001) 37 EHRR 857, [2001] ECHR 83, (2003) 37 EHRR 43

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 10

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
Cited – McKennitt and others v Ash and Another QBD 21-Dec-2005
The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures.
Held: . .
Cited – Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 24-Jul-2008
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166024

News Verlags Gmbh and CoKG v Austria: ECHR 11 Jan 2000

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+10; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
The rights in article 10 include the right to choose not just the content of what is to be expressed but also the form of such expression: ‘The Court recalls that it is not for the Court, or for the national courts for that matter, to substitute their own views for those of the press as to what technique of reporting should be adopted by journalists. Article 10 protects not only the substance of ideas and information but also the form in which they are conveyed.’

Judges:

E Palm, P

Citations:

[2000] ECHR 5, 31457/96, (2001) 31 EHRR 8

Links:

Worldii, Bailii

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165803

Zana v Turkey: ECHR 25 Nov 1997

Turkey – prison sentence imposed by Diyarbakir National Security Court on account of a statement to journalists (Articles 168 and 312 of the Criminal Code) – accused unable to appear at hearing in that court (Article 226 – 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in force at material time) – length of criminal proceedings against him.
In reviewing the necessity for the interference with the right to freedom of speech, the court will ask not only whether the standards applied by the national authorities were in conformity with Art 10 but also whether they based themselves on unacceptable assessment of the relevant facts. Article 10 ‘is applicable not only to ‘information’ or ‘ideas’ that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no ‘democratic society’.’

Citations:

18954/91, [1997] ECHR 94, [2011] ECHR 2394

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 10

Cited by:

Cited – Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel CA 3-Feb-2005
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable
The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US . .
Cited – Interfact Ltd and Another v Liverpool City Council Admn 23-May-2005
The defendants, operators of licensed sex shops, appealed convictions for offences under the Act. The shops had supplied videos rated R*18 by mail order from the shops. The Trading Standards Officer said this did not satisfy the requirement that . .
Cited – City of London v Samede and Others QBD 18-Jan-2012
The claimant sought an order for possession of land outside St Paul’s cathedral occupied by the protestor defendants, consisting of ‘a large number of tents, between 150 and 200 at the time of the hearing, many of them used by protestors, either . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165562

Wingrove v The United Kingdom: ECHR 25 Nov 1996

The applicant had been refused a certification certificate for his video ‘Visions of Ecstasy’ on the basis that it infringed the criminal law of blasphemy. The Court found that the offence was prescribed by law and served the legitimate aim of protecting the rights of others.
Held: The provision of a system which would allow the refusal of a video certificate permitting distribution, is within an individual nation’s margin of appreciation, and not an infringement of the film distributors right of free speech. ‘Whereas there is little scope under Article 10 paragraph 2 . . for restrictions on political speech or on debate of questions of public interest . . . a wider margin of appreciation is generally available to the contracting states when regulating freedom of expression in relation to matters liable to offend intimate personal convictions within the sphere of morals.’
‘ . . the English law of blasphemy does not prohibit the expression, in any form, of views hostile to the Christian religion. Nor can it be said that opinions which are offensive to Christians necessarily fall within its ambit. As the English courts have indicated, it is the manner in which views are advocated rather than the views themselves which the law seeks to control. The extent of insult to religious feelings must be significant as is clear from the use by the courts of the adjectives ‘contemptuous’, ‘reviling’, ‘scurrilous’, ‘ludicrous’ to depict material of a sufficient degree of offensiveness. The high degree of profanation that must be attained constitutes in itself, a safeguard against arbitrariness. It is against this background that the asserted justification under Article 10(2) in the decisions of the national authorities must be considered.’

Citations:

Times 05-Dec-1996, Case 19/1995, [1997] 24 EHRR 1, 17419/90, [1996] ECHR 60, [1996] ECHR 60

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

Video Recordings Act 1984, European Convention on Human Rights Art 10.2

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Perrin CACD 22-Mar-2002
The defendant had been convicted of publishing obscene articles for gain under the Act. He lived in London, and published a web site which was stored or hosted abroad, containing pornographic items. The investigating officer had called up the . .
Cited – Goldstein, Rimmington v Regina CACD 28-Nov-2003
Two defendants appealed in respect of alleged offences under common law of causing a public nuisance. One had sent race hatred material, and the other bomb hoaxes, through the post. Both claimed that the offence was so ill defined as to be an . .
Cited – Interfact Ltd and Another v Liverpool City Council Admn 23-May-2005
The defendants, operators of licensed sex shops, appealed convictions for offences under the Act. The shops had supplied videos rated R*18 by mail order from the shops. The Trading Standards Officer said this did not satisfy the requirement that . .
Cited – Regina v Rimmington; Regina v Goldstein HL 21-Jul-2005
Common Law – Public Nuisance – Extent
The House considered the elements of the common law offence of public nuisance. One defendant faced accusations of having sent racially offensive materials to individuals. The second was accused of sending an envelope including salt to a friend as a . .
Cited – Green, Regina (on the Application of) v The City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Thoday, Thompson Admn 5-Dec-2007
The claimant appealed from the refusal by the magistrate to issue summonses for the prosecution for blashemous libel of the Director General of the BBC and the producers of a show entitled ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera.’
Held: The gist of the . .
Cited – Core Issues Trust v Transport for London Admn 22-Mar-2013
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision made by TfL not to allow an advertisement on behalf of the Trust to appear on the outside of its buses. It was to read: ‘NOT GAY! EX-GAY, POST-GAY AND PROUD. GET OVER IT!’. The decision was said to . .
Cited – Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Nov-2014
The claimant had supported the grant of a visa to a woman in order to speak to members of Parliament who was de facto leader of an Iranian organsation which had in the past supported terrorism and had been proscribed in the UK, but that proscription . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Human Rights, Crime

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165468

Prager And Oberschlick v Austria: ECHR 26 Apr 1995

Article 10 requires that journalists be permitted a good deal of latitude in how they present their material and that a degree of exaggeration must also be accepted. The media have a special place in any democratic society as purveyor of information and public watchdog. There is a strong public interest in maintaining the confidence of the public at large in the courts. Article 6 is intended, among other things, to promote confidence in the judicial process: ‘Regard must . . be had to the special role of the judiciary in society. As the guarantor of justice, a fundamental value in a law-governed State, it must enjoy public confidence if it is to be successful in carrying out its duties.’

Citations:

15974/90, (1996) 21 EHRR 1, [1995] ECHR 12, [1995] ECHR 12, [1995] ECHR 12 – 2

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure) FD 19-Mar-2004
The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd QBD 2-Dec-2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly . .
Cited – Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel CA 3-Feb-2005
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable
The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Company v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council and X and Y FD 24-Nov-2005
Application was made by the claimant for orders discharging an order made in 1991 to protect the identity of children and social workers embroiled in allegations of satanic sex abuse. The defendant opposed disclosure of the names of two social . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v The Telegraph Group Ltd CA 25-Jan-2006
The defendant appealed agaiunst a finding that it had defamed the claimant by repeating the contents of papers found after the invasion of Iraq which made claims against the claimant. The paper had not sought to justify the claims, relying on . .
Cited – Norfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 1-Nov-2006
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified.
Held: A judge . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165353

Observer and Guardian v The United Kingdom: ECHR 26 Nov 1991

The newspapers challenged orders preventing their publication of extracts of the ‘Spycatcher’ book.
Held: The dangers inherent in prior restraints are such that they call for the most careful scrutiny on the part of the court. This is especially so as far as the press is concerned, for news is a perishable commodity and to delay its publication, even for a short period, may well deprive it of all its value and interest. ‘[T]he dangers inherent in prior restraint are such that they call for the most careful scrutiny on the part of the Court. This is especially so as far as the press is concerned, for news is a perishable commodity and to delay its publication, even for a short period, may well deprive it of all its value and interest.’

Citations:

13585/88, [1991] 14 EHRR 153, [1991] ECHR 49, [1991] ECHR 1385

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Douglas, Zeta Jones, Northern and Shell Plc v Hello! Limited (No 1) CA 21-Dec-2000
The first two claimants sold exclusive rights to photograph their wedding to the third claimant. A paparrazzi infiltrated the wedding and then sold his unauthorised photographs to the defendants, who now appealed injunctions restraining them from . .
Cited – Greene v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant appealed against refusal of an order restraining publication by the respondent of an article about her. She said that it was based upon an email falsely attributed to her.
Held: ‘in an action for defamation a court will not impose . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Company v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council and X and Y FD 24-Nov-2005
Application was made by the claimant for orders discharging an order made in 1991 to protect the identity of children and social workers embroiled in allegations of satanic sex abuse. The defendant opposed disclosure of the names of two social . .
Cited – Times Newspapers Ltd (Nos. 1 And 2) v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Mar-2009
The applicant alleged that the rule under United Kingdom law whereby each time material is downloaded from the Internet a new cause of action in libel proceedings accrued (‘the Internet publication rule’) constituted an unjustifiable and . .
Cited – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4) Admn 4-Feb-2009
In an earlier judgment, redactions had been made relating to reports by the US government of its treatment of the claimant when held by them at Guantanamo bay. The claimant said he had been tortured and sought the documents to support his defence of . .
Cited – Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Jan-2012
The first applicant had been chairman of a jury and had expressed his concerns about their behaviour to the second applicant who published them. They were prosecuted under the 1981 Act. They had said that no details of the deliberations had been . .
Cited – Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Jan-2012
The first applicant had been chairman of a jury and had expressed his concerns about their behaviour to the second applicant who published them. They were prosecuted under the 1981 Act. They had said that no details of the deliberations had been . .
Cited – Core Issues Trust v Transport for London Admn 22-Mar-2013
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision made by TfL not to allow an advertisement on behalf of the Trust to appear on the outside of its buses. It was to read: ‘NOT GAY! EX-GAY, POST-GAY AND PROUD. GET OVER IT!’. The decision was said to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165137

Lingens v Austria: ECHR 8 Jul 1986

Freedom of expression, as secured in paragraph 1 of Article 10, constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each individual’s self-fulfilment. Subject to paragraph 2, it is applicable not only to ‘information’ or ‘ideas’ that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no ‘democratic society’. ‘The limits of acceptable criticism are accordingly wider as regards a politician as such than as regards a private individual. Unlike the latter, the former inevitably and knowingly lays himself open to close scrutiny of his every word and deed by both journalists and the public at large, and he must consequently display a greater degree of tolerance. No doubt article 10(2) enables the reputation of others–that is to say, of all individuals–to be protected, and this protection extends to politicians too, even when they are not acting in their private capacity; but in such cases the requirements of such protection have to be weighed in relation to the interests of open discussion of political issues.’

Judges:

Ryssdal P

Citations:

(1986) 8 EHRR 407, 9815/82, [1986] ECHR 7

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 10

Cited by:

Cited – Benjamin, Vanderpool and Gumbs v The Minister of Information and Broadcasting and The Attorney General for Anguilla PC 14-Feb-2001
PC (Anguilla) A first non-religious radio station had been formed, but came to include much criticism of the government. One programme was suspended by the government. The programme makers complained that this . .
Cited – George Worme Grenada Today Limited v The Commissioner of Police PC 29-Jan-2004
PC (Grenada) The defendant was editor of a newspaper which carried a story severely defamatory of the prime minister. He was convicted of criminal libel, and appealed.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The . .
Cited – Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others HL 28-Oct-1999
Fair Coment on Political Activities
The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the . .
Cited – Al-Fagih v H H Saudi Research and Marketing (UK) Ltd CA 1-Nov-2001
The media’s right to freedom of expression, particularly in the field of political discussion ‘is of a higher order’ than ‘the right of an individual to his good reputation.’ The majority upheld an appeal against a trial judge’s ruling that the . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd QBD 2-Dec-2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly . .
Cited – Steel and Morris v United Kingdom ECHR 15-Feb-2005
The applicants had been sued in defamation by McDonalds. They had no resources, and English law precluded legal aid for such cases. The trial was the longest in English legal history. They complained that the non-availablility of legal aid infringed . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v The Telegraph Group Ltd CA 25-Jan-2006
The defendant appealed agaiunst a finding that it had defamed the claimant by repeating the contents of papers found after the invasion of Iraq which made claims against the claimant. The paper had not sought to justify the claims, relying on . .
Cited – Gaunt v OFCOM and Liberty QBD 13-Jul-2010
The claimant, a radio presenter sought judicial review of the respondent’s finding (against the broadcaster) that a radio interview he had conducted breached the Broadcasting Code. He had strongly criticised a proposal to ban smokers from being . .
Cited – Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission v Gibbons; Same v Karoonian CA 30-Oct-2012
Non-resident parents in each case appealed against suspended orders of imprisonment for non-payment of child support. They argued that the procedures used were indistinguishable from those held to be human rights non-compliant in Mubarak.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Defamation, Media

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.164969

GKR Karate (UK) Limited v Porch, Yorkshire Post Newspaper, Holmes: QBD 17 Jan 2000

The claimant sought damages alleging defamation. The judge ordered certain elements of the case to be heard first, and others, if necessary later. Although the case had been begun under the old rules, the new civil procedure regime gave the judge much wider powers of management, and defamation cases were notoriously expensive and lengthy and the powers were particularly appropriate for use in defamation cases. As to qualified privilege: ‘A privileged occasion exists if the public is entitled to know the particular information. That is, if it was the journalist’s social or moral duty to communicate it and the interest of the particular public to receive it. This is determined in the light of all the circumstances of the publication and, in particular, whether the sources were, or appeared to be reliable, to a reasonable and responsible journalist. While Lord Nicholls’ ten examples are not to be taken as written in stone, they form the basic framework upon which a judge can do the balancing exercise.’ and ‘In particular, I am adjured to avoid hindsight, attach importance to the freedom of expression, be slow to conclude that publication was not in the public interest, to resolve any lingering doubts in favour of publication, and to be flexible in my approach.’

Judges:

Sir Oliver Popplewell

Citations:

Gazette 27-Jan-2000, Times 09-Feb-2000, [2000] EWHC QB 180, (2000) EMLR 396

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – MacIntyre v Phillips and Others CA 24-Jul-2001
The appellant police officers and others were defendants in an action for defamation. They appealed a refusal of a trial of the preliminary issue as to whether they had the benefit of qualified privilege. They said that recent case law (GKR Karate . .
Appeal from – GKR Karate (UK) Ltd v Yorkshire Post Newspapers Ltd (No1) CA 21-Jan-2000
It was arguable that a defendant in defamation proceedings could pray in aid in his claim for qualified privilege circumstances not known to him at the time of the publication: ‘there was a real, if problematic, prospect of success.’
May LJ . .
Cited – Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Limited (No 2) CA 12-Mar-2001
The defendants appealed against a refusal to allow them to amend their pleadings. They wished to include allegations as to matters which were unknown to the journalist at the time of publication.
Held: It is necessary for the defendants to . .
Cited – Armstrong v Times Newspapers Ltd and David Walsh, Alan English CA 29-Jul-2005
The claimant sought damages after publication by the first defendant of articles which it was claimed implied that he had taken drugs. The paper claimed qualified privilege, and claimed Reynolds immunity.
Held: The defence of qualified . .
Cited – Grobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another CA 18-Jan-2001
The claimant had been awarded andpound;85,000 damages in defamation after the defendant had wrongly accused him of cheating at football. The newspaper sought to appeal saying that the verdict was perverse and the defence of qualified privilege . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Litigation Practice, Media

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.163132

NTL Group Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v S Constabulary: Admn 22 Jul 2002

The claimant sought judicial review of the granting of a special protection order with regard to the retention of emails sent by their customers, and for permission to destroy material relating to the application. The result, said the applicant, would overwhelm their storage systems, and to put them in breach of section 1 of the 2000 Act. ‘The question then arises whether the provisions of paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 provide the authority which is required in section 1(5)(c) of the RIP Act for NTL to take the action which that paragraph requires a person upon whom an application under section 9 of PACE to take.’
Held: The request was refused: ‘it is implicit in the terms of paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 of PACE that the body subject to an application under section 9 (here NTL) has the necessary power arising implicitly from the language of paragraph 11 of Schedule 1, read together with section 9, to take the action which they apparently have to take in order to conserve the communications by e-mail within the system until such time as the court decides whether or not to make an order. That being so, that implicit power provides the lawful authority for the purposes of section 1(5) and no offence will therefore be committed if NTL acts in accordance with paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 when served with an application under section 9. ‘
Lord Woolf CJ considered the effect of subsection 2(7) of the 2000 Act: ‘Sub-section (7) has the effect of extending the time of communication until the intended recipient has collected it. It is essential on the evidence in this case that if NTL are to preserve the material, they take action before the intended recipient has collected the e-mail. Sub-section (7) means that we are here concerned with what happens in the course of transmission.’

Judges:

The Lord Woolf of Barnes LCJ, Curtis J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1585 (Admin), [2003] QB 131, [2002] 3 WLR 1173

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 1 9

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Edmondson and Others v Regina CACD 28-Jun-2013
Course of Transmission includes Voicemails
The defendants appealed against convictions for conspiracy to intercept telephone voicemail messages whilst employed in various positions in newspapers. The issue boiled down to when the ‘course of transmission’ of a voicemail message ended, that is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Media

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.539975

Norowzian v Arks Limited and Others: ChD 17 Jul 1998

A film whose defining and innovative characteristic was the editing which produced stylised jumps in the action, which were incapable of performance by the actor, was not a dramatic work protected by copyright. A film per se cannot be a dramatic work within the meaning of the 1988 Act, though it can be a recording of such a work for the purpose of section 3(2).

Judges:

Rattee J

Citations:

Times 27-Jul-1998, Gazette 16-Sep-1998, [1999] EMLR 67, [1998] EWHC 315 (Ch), [1999] FSR 79

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 1(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Mehdi Norowzian v Arks Ltd and Guinness Brewing Worldwide Limited (No 2) CA 11-Nov-1999
The claimant film artist showed a film to an advertising agency, who did not make use of it, but later appeared to use techniques and styles displayed in the film in subsequent material sold to third parties.
Held: A film was protected as a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Intellectual Property

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.136091

Criminal proceedings against Denuit: ECJ 29 May 1997

ECJ Judgment – 1 Freedom to provide services – Television broadcasting – Directive 89/552 – Television broadcaster coming under the jurisdiction of a Member State – Determining criterion – Establishment – Effects of the origin of broadcast programmes on a Member State’s jurisdiction – None
(Council Directive 89/552, Art. 2(1))
2 Freedom to provide services – Television broadcasting – Directive 89/552 – Monitoring compliance with the directive – Monitoring to be undertaken by the Member State in which broadcasts originate – Prevention by a Member State of the retransmission of broadcasts not complying with Articles 4 and 5 of the directive by a broadcaster over which another Member State has jurisdiction – Not permissible – Exceptions
(Council Directive 89/552, Art. 2(2))
3 Member States – Obligations – Unilateral action – Prohibition
4 Article 2(1) of Directive 89/552 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities is to be interpreted as meaning that a television broadcaster comes under the jurisdiction of the Member State in which it is established.
Although the Directive does not expressly define `broadcasters under [a Member State’s] jurisdiction’, it follows from the wording of Article 2(1) that the concept of a Member State’s jurisdiction must be understood as necessarily covering jurisdiction ratione personae over television broadcasters, which can be based only on their connection to that Member State’s legal system, which in substance overlaps with the concept of establishment used in the first paragraph of Article 59 of the Treaty, the wording of which presupposes that the supplier and the recipient of a service are `established’ in two different Member States.
The origin of programmes broadcast by a television broadcaster or their conformity with Articles 4 and 5 of the Directive are irrelevant in determining the Member State having jurisdiction over a television broadcaster for the purposes of Article 2(1) of the Directive.
5 Article 2(2) of Directive 89/552 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities is to be interpreted as meaning that a Member State may not oppose the retransmission on its territory of broadcasts of a television broadcaster over which another Member State has jurisdiction when those broadcasts do not conform with the requirements of Articles 4 and 5 of the Directive.
Under the system established by the Directive for allocating obligations between Member States from which broadcasts emanate and Member States which receive them, only the Member State from which television broadcasts emanate must monitor the application of the law of the originating Member State applying to such broadcasts and ensure compliance with the Directive and the receiving Member State may not exercise its own control in that regard.
Only in the circumstances provided for in the second sentence of Article 2(2) of the Directive may the receiving Member State exceptionally suspend retransmission of television broadcasts, on the conditions laid down by that provision.
6 A Member State may not unilaterally adopt, on its own authority, corrective or protective measures designed to obviate any breach by another Member State of rules of Community law.

Citations:

C-14/96, [1997] EUECJ C-14/96

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Directive 89/552 2(1)

Jurisdiction:

European

Media

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161762

ITV Services Ltd v HMRC: UTTC 7 Feb 2012

UTTC National Insurance Contributions – when are self-employed entertainers deemed to be in employment for National Insurance purposes? – liability of entertainers and film and television producers to make Class 1 National Insurance Contribution

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 47 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes – Other, Media

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.452891

Commission v Luxembourg: ECJ 7 Nov 1996

ECJ (Judgment) 1. National provisions simply reproducing the text of Directive 86/361 on the initial stage of the mutual recognition of type approval for telecommunications terminal equipment are not sufficient to transpose Directive 91/263 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning telecommunications terminal equipment, including the mutual recognition of their conformity. Between Directive 86/361 and Directive 91/263 there are clear differences as a result of which a Member State cannot claim to have implemented the second simply by having transposed the first. Amongst other things, Directive 91/263 constitutes, in relation to Directive 86/361, a further stage for full mutual recognition of type approval for terminal equipment, has an aim and a scope wider than Directive 86/361, lays down three requirements for terminal equipment which do not appear in the list of the essential requirements set out in Directive 86/361 and introduces a system of EC marking for terminal equipment complying with the requirements of the directive, which was not provided for by Directive 86/361.
2. The fact that a practice is in conformity with the requirements of a directive in the matter of protection can provide no reason for not transposing that directive into national law by means of provisions capable of creating a situation which is sufficiently precise, clear and transparent to enable individuals to ascertain their rights and obligations. Similarly, a draft national regulation is not capable of transposing a directive.

Citations:

C-221/94, [1996] EUECJ C-221/94

Links:

Bailii

European, Media

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161405

CIA Security International v Signalson and Securitel: ECJ 30 Apr 1996

1. Under the procedure provided for by Article 177 of the Treaty, it is for the national court to assess the scope of national provisions and the manner in which they are to be applied. Since the national court is best placed to assess, in view of the particularities of the case, the need for a preliminary ruling in order to give its judgment, preliminary questions cannot be regarded as having become redundant as a result of national legislation being replaced by other legislation.
2. A national provision according to which only persons with prior ministerial authorization may operate a security firm does not constitute a technical regulation within the meaning of Article 1 of the Directive 83/189, laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations, in so far as such a provision merely lays down the conditions for the establishment of security firms and contains no specifications defining the characteristics of products.
On the other hand, provisions laying down the procedure for approval of alarm systems and networks which security firms may make available to consumers do constitute such technical regulations in so far as such provisions lay down detailed rules defining in particular the conditions concerning the quality tests and function tests which must be fulfilled in order for an alarm system or network to be approved and marketed in the national territory.
In the case of a rule which provides that the products in question may be marketed only after having being previously approved according to a procedure to be laid down by administrative regulation, classification of such a rule depends on its legal effects under domestic law. If, under domestic law, such a rule merely serves as a basis for enabling administrative regulations containing rules binding on the persons concerned to be adopted, so that by itself it has no legal effect for individuals, the rule does not constitute a technical regulation within the meaning of the directive. If, however, it obliges the undertakings concerned to apply for prior approval of their equipment, it must be classified as a technical regulation, even if the administrative rules envisaged have not been adopted.
3. Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 83/189, laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations, under which Member States must notify the Commission of all draft technical regulations covered by the directive and, except in particular urgent cases, suspend their adoption and implementation for specified periods, are to be interpreted as meaning that individuals may rely on them before the national court, which must decline to apply a national technical regulation which has not been notified in accordance with the directive.
First, by laying down a precise obligation on Member States to notify draft technical regulations before they are adopted, those provisions are unconditional and sufficiently precise in terms of their content. Secondly, an interpretation of the directive to the effect that breach of the obligation to notify constitutes a substantial defect such as to render the technical regulations in question inapplicable to individuals is such as to ensure the effectiveness of the preventive Community control for which the directive made provision in order to ensure that goods can move freely, which is what it was designed to do.
4. Article 30 of the Treaty does not preclude a national provision according to which only persons with prior ministerial authorization may operate a security firm. Since such a provision imposes a condition for the establishment and carrying on of business as a security firm, it does not fall within the scope of Article 30.

Citations:

C-194/94, [1996] EUECJ C-194/94, [1996] ECR I-2201

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Budimir and Another CACD 29-Jun-2010
The defendants sought leave to appeal out of time saying that their convictions had been under the 1984 Act which was later found to have been unenforceable for failure to comply with notification requirements under European law. The 1984 Act had . .
Cited – British Telecommunications Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills Admn 20-Apr-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of legislative provisions requiring Internet Service Providers to become involved in regulation of copyright infringements by its subscribers. They asserted that the Act and proposed Order were contrary to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161387

Ortscheit v Eurim-Pharm: ECJ 10 Nov 1994

ECJ The national prohibition of advertising for medicinal products which despite the general requirement of authorization are not authorized in a country, but may be imported from another Member State of the European Community in response to an individual order if they have been lawfully put into circulation in that Member State, is, inasmuch as it affects only imported products, a measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction within the meaning of Article 30 of the EEC Treaty.
That prohibition is however justified under Article 36 on grounds pertaining to the protection of the health and life of humans because it is necessary for the effectiveness of the national authorization scheme, which Member States are entitled to maintain in the absence of a procedure for Community authorization or mutual recognition of national authorizations.

Citations:

C-320/93, [1994] EUECJ C-320/93, [1994] ECR I-5243

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EEC Treaty 30 36

European, Media

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161157

HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd: ChD 13 Jan 2006

The claimant had for many years kept private journals, whose contents were circulated within a small circle of friends. He now sought to claim confidentiality and copyright in them when the defendant sought to publish them.
Held: There was an arguable case that confidence existed in some part of the journals. The order for restraint againt publication was continued until a full hearing.

Judges:

Kitchin J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 11 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 31.22

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Home Office v Hariette Harman HL 11-Feb-1982
The defendant had permitted a journalist to see documents revealed to her as in her capacity as a solicitor in the course of proceedings.
Held: The documents were disclosed under an obligation to use them for the instant case only. That rule . .
Cited – Lilly Icos Ltd v Pfizer Ltd (No 2) CA 23-Jan-2002
The respondent sought an order to maintain the confidentiality of documents disclosed during patent revocation proceedings. It now appealed an order refusing confidentiality.
Held: Under normal circumstances, a party requesting such an order . .
Cited – Bonzel v Intervention Ltd 1991
‘the duty placed upon the patentee to make full disclosure of all relevant documents (which is required in amendment proceedings) is one which should not be fettered by any action of the courts. Reluctance of this court to go into camera to hear . .

Cited by:

See Also – HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd. ChD 17-Mar-2006
Application for summary judgment.
Held: Granted . .
See Also – Associated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales CA 21-Dec-2006
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Intellectual Property, Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.237597

Federacion de Distribuidores Cinematograficos v Spanish State: ECJ 4 May 1993

(Rec 1993,p I-2239) (SV93-181) (Judgment) 1. Freedom to provide services – Provisions of the Treaty – Field of application – Exploitation, in a Member State, in a cinema or on television of cinematographic films produced in other Member States – Inclusion
(EEC Treaty, Art. 59 et seq.)
2. Freedom to provide services – Restrictions – Rules linking the grant of licences to dub cinematographic films from third countries to the distribution of national films – Discriminatory effect with regard to producers established in other Member States – Not permissible – Derogations – Grounds of public policy – Pursuit of objectives of an economic nature – Not permissible
(EEC Treaty, Arts 56 and 59)

Citations:

C-17/92, [1993] EUECJ C-17/92

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Media

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160850

Regina v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte Gallaher and others (Judgment): ECJ 22 Jun 1993

Member States may decide size of government health warnings on cigarettes
ECJ Articles 3(3) and 4(4) of Directive 89/622 on the labelling of tobacco products provide respectively that the indications of tar and nicotine yields and the general and specific health warnings that cigarette packets must carry shall cover at least 4% of the surfaces for which they are intended. Those provisions must be interpreted as meaning that, if they consider it to be necessary, Member States are at liberty to decide, so far as domestic production is concerned, that those indications and warnings should cover a greater surface area in view of the level of public awareness of the health risks associated with tobacco consumption. In so far as those Member States cannot make subject to the same requirement products imported from the other Member States which comply with the minimum requirements of the directive, there is a risk of less favourable treatment for national products and of inequality in conditions of competition, although this is inherent in harmonization which confines itself to laying down minimum requirements.

Citations:

Times 28-Jun-1993, C-11/92, [1993] EUECJ C-11/92

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 89/622 3(3) 4(4)

Cited by:

Cited – Khatun, Zeb, Iqbal v London Borough of Newham Admn 10-Oct-2003
Each applicant had been accepted as homeless by the respondent, but was then offered alternative accomodation under terms which they found unacceptable. They argued that the Regulations applied. The council had disapplied one statutory guidance in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Health, Media

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160847

Commission v Belgium C-211/91: ECJ 16 Dec 1992

ECJ (Judgment) 1. By prohibiting cable television companies from broadcasting on their networks programmes from radio or television broadcasting stations in other Member States, where the programmes are not transmitted in the language or one of the languages of the Member State in which the station is established, a Member State is in breach of its obligations under Article 59 of the Treaty.
Such a restriction, which is discriminatory in that it is not applicable to services without distinction as regards their origin, cannot be brought within any of the grounds for exemption from the freedom to provide services permitted by Community law, that is to say those laid down in Article 56 of the Treaty.
2. While it is true that a Member State cannot be denied the right to take measures to prevent a provider of services whose activity is entirely or principally directed towards its territory from exercising the freedom guaranteed by Article 59 of the Treaty for the purpose of avoiding the professional rules of conduct which would be applicable to him if he were established within that State, it does not follow that it is permissible for a Member State to prohibit altogether the provision of certain services by operators established in other Member States.

Citations:

[1992] ECR I-6757, [1992] EUECJ C-211/91

Links:

Bailii

European, Media

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160762

Regina on the Application of Anna Ford v The Press Complaints Commission: Admn 31 Jul 2001

The complainant had been photographed wearing a bikini, whilst on holiday by a photographer using a long lens. She had been on a quiet part of public beach. She complained to the Press Complaints Commission who rejected her complaint. The rules required press not to use such tactics when the subject was on private property, and the definition of that included a place where there was a reasonable expectation of privacy. The commission found it to be a public place. She sought to review their decision. The commission that it exercised a public function under the Act. On judicial review, the court was not to substitute its own decision for that of the executive. The human rights law might now require a more intensive review, when considering the proportionality of any interference with the subject’s rights of privacy. Nevertheless, the English courts will continue to defer to the views of bodies like the Commission even after the HRA. In this case also there had been a delay in applying for the review, and the application for leave to review was dismissed.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr. Justice Sibler

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 683

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Code of Practice of the Press Complaints Commission, Human Rights Act 1998 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Yaser Mahmood) v Secretary of State for Home Department Admn 9-Aug-2001
The Home Secretary had served notice that the applicant was an illegal immigrant, and liable to deportation. An order had been made for the cross examination of the applicant. He had come to England to study, but soon dropped his immediate plans. He . .
Cited – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .
Cited – Regina v Press Complaints Commission and Stewart-Brady (By Next Friend Kerr) CA 18-Nov-1996
Judicial review of a decision of the Press Complaints Commission was not appropriate. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Information, Judicial Review, Human Rights, Administrative

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159895

Cable and Wireless (Dominica) Limited v Marpin Telecoms and Broadcasting Company Limited: PC 30 Oct 2000

(Dominica) The importance of telecommunications in today’s society meant that it would be an infringement of the right of freedom of expression guaranteed under the constitution to grant a monopoly right to provide such services within a nation. Interference with the provision of a telecommunications service can amount to interfering with the freedom of expression of those who would wish to use that service. The court must then decide whether such a restriction was reasonably required in a democratic society, to protect the rights and freedoms of others. It then fell to the challenger to show that it was not reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.

Judges:

Lord Cooke of Thorndon

Citations:

Times 09-Jan-2001, [2000] UKPC 42, [2001] 1 WLR 1123

Links:

Bailii, PC

Cited by:

Cited – Benjamin, Vanderpool and Gumbs v The Minister of Information and Broadcasting and The Attorney General for Anguilla PC 14-Feb-2001
PC (Anguilla) A first non-religious radio station had been formed, but came to include much criticism of the government. One programme was suspended by the government. The programme makers complained that this . .
Cited – George Worme Grenada Today Limited v The Commissioner of Police PC 29-Jan-2004
PC (Grenada) The defendant was editor of a newspaper which carried a story severely defamatory of the prime minister. He was convicted of criminal libel, and appealed.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The . .
Cited – Observer Publications Limited v Campbell ‘Mickey’ Matthew The Commissioner of Police and The Attorney General PC 19-Mar-2001
PC (Antigua and Barbuda) The claimant complained of the delay by the respondents in processing their request for a licence to run a radio station. It appealed refusal of constitutional redress and thta its right . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Human Rights, Commonwealth

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159430

Regina v Secretary of State for Health and Others, ex parte Imperial Tobacco Limited and others: HL 7 Dec 2000

Where a party sought an injunction to prevent a government from implementing a European Union directive, pending a decision from the European Court, on whether domestic or community law was to be applied, the domestic court must refer the matter to the European Court of Justice. This was necessary to achieve consistency throughout the Union, and even though such an order would interfere with the operation of the directive.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Hoffmann Lord Clyde Lord Millett

Citations:

Times 20-Dec-2000, [2000] UKHL 60, [2001] 1 All ER 850, [2001] 1 WLR 127

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 98/43/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Zuckerfabrik Suderdithmarschen and Zuckerfabrik Soest v Hauptzollamt Itzehoe and Hauptzollamt Paderborn ECJ 21-Feb-1991
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Constitutional, Media

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159094

Regina vNewcastle Chronicle and Journal Ltd, Ex parte Attorney-General: QBD 18 Jan 1978

Citations:

Times 18-Jan-1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd HL 1-Feb-1979
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.182815

Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Marks and Spencer Plc: CA 26 May 2000

The defendant had a cuttings service, and distributed selected articles amongst its staff. The Agency complained that this amounted to copying a substantial part of the editions from which the cuttings were taken. There was no typographical copyright infringed as the layout had changed, and the work referred to was the entire paper edition, and the question of what was a substantial part of the edition was a matter of impression. The statutory definition of a ‘published edition’ meant that copyright could subsist in the typographical arrangement of the newspaper as a whole.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mance Lord Justice Chadwick Lord Justice Peter Gibson

Citations:

Times 15-Jun-2000, Gazette 22-Jun-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 179, [2001] Ch 257

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 30(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – The Newspaper Licensing Agency Limited v Marks and Spencer Plc PatC 19-Jan-1999
The daily circulation within a large company of press cuttings was outside the scope of the reporting of current events defences to copyright infringement. Ownership of the typographical arrangement of a newspaper article sufficed to found a claim. . .
Appealed to – Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Marks and Spencer Plc HL 12-Jul-2001
The respondent company subscribed to a cuttings service, but redistributed the cuttings within its offices. The cuttings agency claimed that the re-distribution infringed their rights in the typographical arrangement. The cuttings did not give any . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – The Newspaper Licensing Agency Limited v Marks and Spencer Plc PatC 19-Jan-1999
The daily circulation within a large company of press cuttings was outside the scope of the reporting of current events defences to copyright infringement. Ownership of the typographical arrangement of a newspaper article sufficed to found a claim. . .
Appeal from – Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Marks and Spencer Plc HL 12-Jul-2001
The respondent company subscribed to a cuttings service, but redistributed the cuttings within its offices. The cuttings agency claimed that the re-distribution infringed their rights in the typographical arrangement. The cuttings did not give any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Media

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147212

Regina v Broadcasting Standards Commission, Ex Parte British Broadcasting Corporation: CA 6 Apr 2000

The Act protects the privacy of a corporate body. A television company which secretly filmed in a company’s store could be held to have infringed the privacy of the company by the Broadcasting Standards Commission. The Act went further than the Human Rights Convention in this respect, but there is no reason to limit the extent of the operation of the Act to match the convention. ‘An infringement of privacy is an affront to the personality, which is damaged both by the violation and by the demonstration that the personal space is not inviolate.’
Lord Mustill said: ‘To my mind the privacy of a human being denotes at the same time the personal ‘space’ in which the individual is free to be itself, and also the carapace, or shell, or umbrella, or whatever other metaphor is preferred, which protects that space from intrusion. An infringement of privacy is an affront to the personality, which is damaged both by the violation and by the demonstration that the personal space is not inviolate.’

Judges:

The Master Of The Rolls, Lady Justice Hale And Lord Mustill

Citations:

Times 12-Apr-2000, Gazette 28-Apr-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 116, [2001] QB 885

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Broadcasting Standards Act 1996 110 111, European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Broadcasting Standards Commission ex parte British Broadcasting Corporation Admn 9-Jul-1999
The Corporation challenged a finding that it had infringed the privacy of a film subject of an investigation by the Watchdog programme. The corporation said that the subject, Dixons, as a corporation, had no right of privacy under Human Rights Law. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Regina v Broadcasting Standards Commission ex parte British Broadcasting Corporation Admn 9-Jul-1999
The Corporation challenged a finding that it had infringed the privacy of a film subject of an investigation by the Watchdog programme. The corporation said that the subject, Dixons, as a corporation, had no right of privacy under Human Rights Law. . .
Cited – Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
Cited – Lord Browne of Madingley v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 3-Apr-2007
The appellant sought to restrict publication by the defendants in the Mail on Sunday of matters which he said were a breach of confidence. He had lied to a court in giving evidence, whilst at the same time being ready to trash the reputation of his . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999: Application By the British Broadcasting Corporation To Set Aside or Vary a Reporting Restriction Order HL 17-Jun-2009
An application was made to discharge an anonymity order made in previous criminal proceedings before the House. The defendant was to be retried for rape under the 2003 Act, after an earlier acquittal. The applicant questioned whether such a order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Intellectual Property, Human Rights

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147149

Columbia Tristar Home Video (International) Inc v Polygram Film International BV (Formerly Manifesto Film Sales BV): CA 8 Feb 2000

The court considered a contract requiring access to be given to accounts records for auditing licence fees.

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 32

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Sawyer v Atari Interactive Inc ChD 1-Nov-2005
The claimant owned the copyright in several successful computer games. He had granted licenses for the use of the software, which licences were assigned to the defendants. Disputes arose as to the calculation of royalty payments, and the claimant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Media

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147065

Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Mercury Personal Communications Limited and Mercury Personal Communications (a Firm Trading As One2One): CA 6 Aug 1999

It was within the Secretary of State’s powers to insist that those mobile phone operators who wished to renew their licences, or bid for further licences, should first, and as a condition of so doing, accept as a precondition for such application, consent to alterations in the terms of their existing licences.

Citations:

Gazette 27-Oct-1999, Times 20-Oct-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 2072, [1999] EWCA Civ 1560

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Wireless Telegraphy Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Licensing, Media

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.146987

Holley, SD and R Trading Limited, Henry Ansbacher and Co Limited, Ansbacher (Jersey) Limited v Smith: CA 4 Dec 1997

The motive for a threatened publication, was not relevant, when considering whether to restrain publication beforehand. Sir Christopher Slade said: ‘I accept that the court may be left with a residual discretion to decline to apply the rule in Bonnard v. Perryman in exceptional circumstances. One exception, recognised in that decision itself, is the case where the court is satisfied that the defamatory statement is clearly untrue. In my judgment, however, that is a discretion which must be exercised in accordance with established principles.’
The motive for a threatened publication was not relevant when considering whether to restrain publication beforehand.

Judges:

Auld LJ, Sir Christopher Slade

Citations:

Times 20-Dec-1997, Gazette 14-Jan-1998, [1997] EWCA Civ 2914, [1998] QB 726, [1998] 1 All ER 853

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Bonnard v Perryman CA 2-Jan-1891
Although the courts possessed a jurisdiction, ‘in all but exceptional cases’, they should not issue an interlocutory injunction to restrain the publication of a libel which the defence sought to justify except where it was clear that that defence . .

Cited by:

Cited – Greene v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant appealed against refusal of an order restraining publication by the respondent of an article about her. She said that it was based upon an email falsely attributed to her.
Held: ‘in an action for defamation a court will not impose . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Media

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.143313

Levi and Another v Bates and Others: CA 12 Mar 2015

The second claimant was wife to a businessman involved in football. It was said that the defendant, manager of Leeds United, together with the club and a radio station had harassed the first claimant. She was affected but not the intended victim. She appealed dismissal of her claim.
Held: The 1997 Act did not require for the statutory tort of harassment that the claimant must be a target of the perpetrator’s conduct.
Briggs LJ considered that ‘it is not a requirement of the statutory tort of harassment that the claimant be the (or even a) target of the perpetrator’s conduct’ and ‘provided that it is targeted at someone, the conduct complained of need not be targeted at the claimant, if he or she is foreseeably likely to be directly alarmed or distressed by it’.
Ryder LJ said: ‘[The Judge] ought to have held that targeting is an objective concept that includes a situation where the conduct complained of is not only intended to harm a particular victim, but would also foreseeably harm another person, because of her proximity to the intended victim’.
Longmore LJ said: ‘It is right that, for the statutory tort of harassment to occur, there must be a course of conduct which is aimed (or targeted) at an individual since that is inherent in the term ‘harassment’. But I see no reason why it should be only that individual who can sue, if the defendant knows or ought to know that his conduct will amount to harassment of another individual. The tort (and crime) of harassment does not require an intent to harass any one individual; section 1 of the Act is clear that the question whether conduct is harassing conduct is an objective question for the fact-finder. If therefore a defendant knows or ought to know that his conduct amounts to harassment, he should be liable to the person harassed, even if the conduct is aimed at another person. A defendant is always entitled to show, pursuant to section 1(3) of the Act, that in the particular circumstances, his pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable.’

Judges:

Longmore, Ryder, Briggs LJJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 206, [2015] 3 WLR 769, [2015] 2 Cr App R 19, [2015] EMLR 22, [2016] QB 91, [2015] WLR(D) 119, [2016] 1 All ER 625

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997 1(1) 3(1) 7(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Apperal from – Levi v Bates QBD 2-Jul-2009
The court was asked to make preliminary findings in an action brought regarding what were said to be defamatory remarks published in the football programmes for Leeds United. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Gerrard and Another v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd and Another QBD 27-Nov-2020
The claimants, a solicitor and his wife, sought damages in harassment and data protection, against a party to proceedings in which he was acting professionally, and against the investigative firm instructed by them. The defendants now requested the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Media

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.544258

Leary v Britiah Broadcasting Corporatin: CA 29 Sep 1989

Lord Donaldson MR considered an application for an injunction to prevent a publication which it was said would create a contempt of court, and said: ‘I am very concerned that no one should think that on a speculative basis you can go to the courts and call upon the publisher of printed material or television or radio material to come forward and tell the court exactly what it is proposed to do, and invite the court to act as a censor. That is not the function of the court. It is different, of course, if there is solid evidence as to what the content of the publication will be and that evidence leads the court to conclude that prima facie there will be a contempt of court. Then it would no doubt be right that the defendant should be invited, but not compelled, to tell the court what in fact he intends to publish, because of course if he does not and there is a prima facie case that there will be contempt he will find himself faced with an injunction. But that is not the same thing as setting the courts up as a censorship body to which people must submit material on pain of being prohibited from publishing it.’
Ralph Gibson LJ said: ‘The primary defence of the administration of justice from unlawful interference by [publications] is the heavy sanction of prosecution if a contempt of court is committed.’

Judges:

Lord Donaldson MR, Ralph Gibson LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 29 September 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – McKennitt and others v Ash and Another QBD 21-Dec-2005
The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures.
Held: . .
Cited – Attorney General v Random House Group Ltd QBD 15-Jul-2009
The Attorney-General sought to restrain the publication of a book which she said would prejudice the defendants in a forthcoming criminal trial. The publisher said that a restraint would be a disproportionate interference in its Article 10 rights. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Contempt of Court

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.238822

Free Speech Union and Another v Office of Communications (Ofcom): Admn 9 Dec 2020

‘The Claimants submit that ‘broadcast material which (i) questions public policy or (ii) could undermine the advice of public health bodies or (iii) could undermine mainstream sources of information and/or (iv) which therefore could reduce trust in government or public institutions’ cannot in law be ‘harmful’ material. That means that those things cannot in law be material from whose inclusion Ofcom is entitled to secure adequate protection for the public.’

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 3390 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Media

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.656791